HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Information Memorandum 02-16-1990RECYCLING CASH DRAWING
Feb 14/15: NO WINNER
NEXT WEEK: $400
UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS.....
1. CITY OFFICES CLOSED -- Monday, February 19. President's Day.
2. COUNCIL STUDY & EXECUTIVE SESSIONS -- Saturday, February 24,
9:30 a.m. - Noon, City Council conference room.
Topics: (1) Background and discussion on the uses of
Tax Increment Financing (TIF);
(2) Executive Session with City Attorney to
discuss pending and threatened litigation;
(3) Discuss policy on the revision of stop
sign requests, the "deer problem", and
police "lock -out" policy.
3. COUNCIL STUDY SESSION -- Monday, February 26, 4:30 - 6:30 p.m. City
Council conference room.
Topics: Senior citizen housing, and informal meeting
with State senators and representatives. (A copy
of a memo sent to senators and representatives
Is attached.)
4. PLYMOUTH FORUM -- Monday, February 26, 6:30 p.m. Plymouth Forum
in City Council conference room.
5. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING -- Monday, February 26, 7:00 p.m. Regular
City Council meeting in City Council Chambers.
6. PRECINCT CAUCUSES -- Tuesday, February 27, 7:30 p.m. Attached is a
listing of Plymouth caucus locations for both the Democratic -Farmer
Labor Party and the Independent-Republical Party. Anyone who is now
a qualified voter or will be qualified to vote on November 6, 1990,
and who is a resident of the precinct in which the caucus is held
may participate. No previous party affiliation is required.
7. CALENDARS --- Meeting calendars for February and March are
attached. (M-7)
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
February 16, 1990
Page 2
8. TWIN WEST ANNUAL "STATE OF THE CITY" COFFEE BREAK MEETING - Tuesday,
March 20, 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. The City in cooperation with the Twin
West Chamber of Commerce annually hosts a meeting of local business
people during which we review current development trends in the
community. Councilmembers are cordially invited to attend.
9. METRO COUNCIL - STATE OF THE REGION -- Wednesday, March 7, 12:30
p.m. - 7:00 p.m. The Metropolitan Council will hold its annual
"State of the Region" at the Hyatt Regency Minneapolis. This
year's program will focus on housing and will feature Jack Kemp,
U. S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development as keynote
speaker. A copy of the meeting notice is attached. Councilmembers
interested in attending, should notify Laurie. (M-9)
10. WAYZATA SCHOOLS "PRIDE WEEK" -- Attached is a letter from
Superintendent David Landswerk on tours and open house events taking
place in Wayzata Schools the week of February 21 - 23. (M-10)
FOR YOUR INFORMATION.....
1. MLC 1990 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM - Attached is a copy of the MLC
Legislative Program which was adopted by the general membership at
its meeting of January 29. This program is being sent to members of
the Legislature, as well as other key opinion makers in the
metropolitan community.
It is not likely that the Legislature will undertake serious review
of the property tax structure during this short legislative
session. Nonetheless, there is an effort to heighten the awareness
on the part of the Legislature of the problems being confronted by
most in the suburban communities. There is currently some
discussion emerging dealing with a proposed constitutional amendment
which would have the effect of establishing a single tax rate for
all residential homestead property. Such an amendment would have to
be authorized by the Legislature and be voted upon by the people in
the fall 1990 General Election. In 1977 the State Supreme Court
came close to ruling that a tiered property tax system in the state
was not constitutional. The court ruled 4-3 that the then -existing
tiered tax structure was legal. Justice Yetka developed a
dissenting opinion which is attached for your reading. It suggests
to me that there is a chance that this issue may yet be resolved
through the Supreme Court, although a constitutional amendment would
obviously be a cleaner way to have the problem resolved. (I-1)
W,
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORAkDUH
February 16, 1990
Page 3
2. DARE PROGRAM GRADUATIONS - Public Safety Director Dick Carlquist has
provided me with the dates for the first graduation of our four DARE
program classes. The first graduation will be held at 2 p.m. on
Thursday, May 17 at the Zachary Lane Elementary School; the second
graduation will be held at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, May 23 at the
Greenwood Elementary School; the third graduation will be held on
Friday, May 25 at 2 p.m. at the Gleason Lake Elementary School;
finally, the fourth graduation will be held on Thursday, May 31 at
1:30 p.m. at the Pilgrim Lane Elementary School. You may be
interested in attending one or more of these events. (I-2)
3. KINGSVIEW HEIGHTS BUSINESS COMPLAINT FOLLOWUP - Recently the Council
received a copy of a letter from Mr. Randall Nord dealing with junk
and debris located on a lot at 14505 - 44th Avenue North. According
to the records of the City, the property was owned by the developer
of the plat, Harstad Construction. A community service officer
corresponded with Harstad Construction and they, in turn, have now
Informed us that the lot in question belongs to Dan -Bar Homes. A
letter has now been sent to Mr. Bartus of Dan -Bar Homes, requesting
that he promptly clean up the lot in question. A copy of the
correspondence is attached. (I-3)
4. INTERSECTION SIGHT OBSTRUCTION FOLLOWUP -- Attached is a memo from
Myra Wicklacz as a followup to Councilmember Vasiliou's direction
last year on several intersection sight obstructions. (I-4)
5. FALSE ALARM PERMIT COMPLAINT - Attached is a memo from Darrel'
Anderson of the Police Department outlining a complaint with respect
to the City's false alarm permit procedures. The complainant
apparently is prepared to challenge the City's position on this
matter in court. We have not had this matter brought to court to
determine the validity of our ordinance and this would provide an
opportunity for both the complainant and the City to have that
matter clarified. From the City's perspective, we believe the
ordinance is valid and would be so found by the court. (I-5)
6. DEVELOPMENT SIGNAGE -- On Friday, February 16, development signs
will be placed at the following locations:
a. Southwest corner of County Road 24 and Dunkirk Lane. Hans Hagen
Homes is requesting approval of a Rezoning and Preliminary
Plat. The Rezoning is from FRD (Future Restricted Development)
District to R-lA (Low Density Single-family Residential)
District and B-3 (Service Business) District. The Preliminary
Plat is for the creation of nine single-family lots and one
commercial lot. (89090)
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
February 16, 1990
Page 4
b. North of County Road 9 west of Berkshire Lane. Trammell Crow
Company is requesting approval of a Rezoning, Lot Consolidation/
Division and Site Plan. The Rezoning is from B-1 (Office
Limited Business) District to I-1 (Planned Industrial)
District. The Lot Consolidation and Division is to consolidate
three existing platted lots and redivide into two. The Site
Plan is for an office/warehouse facility located on the
northerly of the two lots. (90005)
c. 17705 8th Avenue North. Eiden Construction is requesting
approval of a Preliminary Plat. The Preliminary Plat is for the
creation of 11 residential lots with a new street being extended
south from 8th Avenue North. (90006).
These requests will be heard by the Planning Commission at their
February 28 meeting.
7. MINUTES:
a. Municipal Legislative Commission Operating Comittee and Board of
Directors Meetings, January 29, 1990. (I -7a)
b. Planning Commission, January 24, 1990. (I -7b)
8. DIAL -A -RIDE RIDERSHIP -- January ridership statistics for the
Dial -A -Ride tansit system are attached. The service had a total of
2,197 passengers for January, averaging 90 passengers per day during -
the weekdays, and 28 passengers per day on the weekend days. (I-8)
9. ROSTER -- A revised Council roster is attached. The roster contains
each Councilmember's Voice Mail number and preferred home or office
contact number. (I-9)
10. RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORMS -- Attached are copies of Resident Feedback
Forms received following the Town Meeting for Area 4 on February
12. The Council will be provided with copies of each staff
response as they are completed. (I-10)
11. STAFF RESPONSES TO AREA 3 FEEDBACK FORMS -- Staff responses to Area
3 and Area 4 feedback forms are attached. (I-11)
12. MINNESOTA MARSHES -- The Star Tribune February 14 paper carried the
attached column by Ron Schara on a legislative proposal by State
Representative Marcus Marsh to preserve wetlands. (I-12)
13. WASTE TRANSFER STATION '-- A status report on Hennepin County's
application for a Waste Transfer Station is attached. (I-13)
I
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL lENORANDUM
February 16, 1990
Page 5
14. CORRESPONDENCE:
1.
a. Letter to Ronald Libby, Bass Lake Liquors, from City Clerk,
concerning penalties imposed by the Council for the July 21,
1989 liquor law violation. (I -14a)
b. Letter from Tom Nelson, State Commissioner of Education, to City
Manager, on the Governor's February 23 special "Capital for A
Day" breakfast meeting at the Robbinsdale Area Community
Education Center, 4139 Regent Avenue North. (I -14b)
c. Letter from LaDonna Hoy, Director, Interfaith Outreach and
Community Partners, requesting information on process for human
service agency funding requests. A response from Frank Boyles
Is also attached. (I-140
James G. Willis
City Manager
JGW:Jm
attachments
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: February 16, 1990
�A —
TO: Senators Ramstad and McGowan, Representatives Abrams, Heap, and Limmer
FROM: dames G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT INFORMAL MEETING WITH PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL
I have previously contacted you directly, or left word with your office that
the City Council would like the opportunity of meeting with you informally
Monday, February 26 at 6 p.m. at the Plymouth City Center. The Council will
be holding a study session earlier in the afternoon which will be concluded
by 6 p.m.
The items we would like to hear from you about, and/or discuss with you will
include the following:
1. Wetland Protection/Preservation - Marcus Marsh bill
2. Tax Increment Financing
3. Projected State Deficit and Means by Which it Might be Made up
4. Property Taxes - Flat Rate for Residential Homesteaded Property
5. Comparable Worth (S.F. 488 A18)
6. Land Use Enabling Act (HF 1654/5F 1510)
Now that's a group of items which are certainly not controversial!
Seriously, we would like to briefly discuss them with you and share views
and perceptions on the issues and hear from you with respect to what you
think the Legislature might do with these topics during this session.
We look forward to meeting with you on the 26th.
3W:kec
cc: Mayor & City Council
11
4
t
RUN DATE: 02/14/90
MUNIC/WARD/PCT
PLYMOUTH
-�p
HENNEPIN COUNTY VOTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. VI5267C
PRECINCT CAUCUS LOCATIONS FOR 1990 PAGE NO. 31
DEMOCRATIC FARMER LABOR LOCATIONS INDEPENDENT -REPUBLICAN LOCATIONS
PRECINCT 1
+PLYMOUTH CITY HALL
*PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
03400 PLYMOUTH BLVD
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
PRECINCT 2
+WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
PLYMOUTH HN 55441
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
14
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
PRECINCT 3
*PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 4
*PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
+PLYMOUTH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 5
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
PLYMOUTH HN 55441
10011 36TH AVE N
16
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 6
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 7
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 8
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 9
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 10
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 11
+PLYMOUTH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT 12
+PLYMOUTH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT
13
*PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH HN 55441
PRECINCT
14
+PLYMOUTH MIDDLE SCHOOL
t�
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
PRECINCT
15
+PLYMOUTH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
t
10011 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH HN 55441
PRECINCT
16
*PLYMOUTH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10011 36TH AVE N
N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
+WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH !N 55447
+WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH HJ 55447
*WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH FN 55447
+HAYZATA SENIOR HIGFF SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH HN 55447
+WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
*WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH HN 55447
+HAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
+WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
+ARMSTRONG SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10635 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
+ARMSTRONG SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10635 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
+HAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH NN 55447
+HAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
*ARMSTRONG SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10635 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH MN 55441
*ARMSTRONG SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
10635 36TH AVE N
PLYMOUTH HN 55441
+HAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH HN 55447
+WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
00305 'VICKSBURG LA N
PLYMOUTH HN 55447
ch o n d .-
��Ne�
ic-w N Qf m N M
W LO N N
O
r N N
cc Q WCD
G
- eV N
a co
O
i
a -
0
to
N
0
a�
N N
2 to N W t0
a � - N
i a m N
cn t -
CD
!h N if
Q
QZ F-
"3
O r N N CO
f
n .a- N CO
N
�A— C
O
H
,`7 H
U V]
C1]
D
HC,
N rn
�+ U
•> I
O
U)d)
N��o�
N
co
Q
LL
T-
M
N
M
N
P4
0
Q
�o
Oa
U
U)
cn
..LLI
� I g
D
NO
1�
M:cc 0-
n
H
U HU
W
-
a 0
U O
d r)
LOLU
N
o
N
Q
2
Q d
O
cl
LO U
3 O1 a
•/\
V
• • Ur M
v, O
LLJ
^~^CD
< CV)
Z
�'
Z
W
�
Z
d'
OJI—
co d C7
r•
Lia
(V
N aJ.
z
z
0
N
LL
V
W
d
r" y
G
0
Cfl
N
N
r„r
U te'
c
d
q�q U �
CL
P+
Z i
Z O
W
W
E-1 H
H H
QO
O=
<_
F~-- n
y
} PUi
to M CO U O
p
U Cf)
o
L�
g
o w
Z
LLJ
LL -LL.
" ON
. �.: dry
�7
Zd
O> -OJ
=_
W
r�
N
o w_
�~, "
co o w Io-
^
O
I .. rt
( )
N LL w
Q
Z
D
d-
N
L
n r N N
LLco - N N
:)In N Qf co
H �' �' N
0 m in
w r r N
J
O N O) m N M
i
Z 00 Lo N N
N
z
U
Q
LL N Of t0 N
S " OD Lr) N
G
a)1-
Of
IE
W
n N N
a 3
W
~
N N
W
LL
O
N
- - LO
O
N
f
Q
p
n
d CO N
N
U
cc
a
�A'7
IE
O
N
Q
p
U
cc
a
F
N
Q
CD
O
M
N
M
Q
p
U
(0
M
O
N
V
N
M
Q
z
CD
cncc
W
W
d.
W d
<M
LC)
<M
N
V—
00
a
T
_ G
N
N
}
�nC)�
oa
U)
?..I p
U
CD .n
CD
z
I�Z
C7 M
LUqt
w CC cu
OJF—V—
00
QC3
V—
LL. aM
N
N
a�
C
Z
Z
'--'
m
z
Q
N
N
,^
U- c
LUC
�
a
M
<o
O
(0
r—m
N
N
J
J
U �•
U �
d
d
Q
UO
p
CMuO
Z
O
O
Q n
Q
czC-
N
LO
V
owH
N
w�
uc=M
Q
p
Z
D
cn
0V-
qt
V-
N
�A-R
THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INVITES YOU
TO ITS STATE OF THE REGION 1990
HOUSING... REBUILDING OUR VISION FOR THE '90s
March 7, 1990
Hyatt Regency Minneapolis • 1300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis
The 1990s promise major change for the housing market in the Twin Cities
Area. Slowed population growth, the aging of the population and our
housing stock all signal the coming change. What will happen in a weakened
market for rental units and starter homes? How can we best meet the growing
housing needs of low-income people? Will we be able to preserve
aging neighborhoods? It's time to challenge our assumptions about housing
and develop a new vision for the 1990s.
Please inquire about continuing education credits for real estate agents and appraisers.
Parking is available at:
- Loring Ramp (entrance on 13th SUNicollet Av.)
- Convention Center Plaza underground Ramp (entrances on 12th St. and 2nd Av.)
- Orchestra Hall Ramp (entrances on 11th St. and Marquette Av.)
REGISTRATION FORM
To register, please send this form and a check for $40 payable to
"State of the Region" by Feb. 28 to:
Bernadine Scott, Metropolitan Council
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth St.
St. Paul, MN 55101 Phone: 291-6500
1 plan to attend the State of the Region on March 7, 1990.
Name
Organization .
Street Address
City/State/Zip.
Phone
PROGRAM
12:30 REGISTRATION
1:30 WELCOME: Steve Keefe. Chair
Metropolitan Council
1:45 KEYNOTE ADDRESS:
A NEW NATIONAL HOUSING AGENDA
Jack Kemp. U.S. Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development
2:45 STATE OF THE REGION ADDRESS:
A NEW FOUNDATION FOR REGIONAL
HOUSING POLICY
Steve Keefe
3:30 BREAK
3:45 GENERAL SESSION:
ASSESSING A NEW HOUSING STRATEGY'
CAN IT WORK?
Moderator:
Barbara Lukermann. Research Associate.
Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs
Panel Members:
Lyn Burton, President,
Development Connections
Representative Richard Jefferson. Minnesota
House of Representatives. District 57B
Peggy Lucas. Vice President.
Brighton Development Corp.
Neil Peterson. Mayor, City of Bloomington
Jim Solent. Commissioner, Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency
5:15 SOCIAL HOUR
6:00 DINNER
6:30 AWARDS PRESENTATION
7:00 CLOSING SESSION
Speech by Regional Citizen of the Year
Mary Anderson. Mayor
The registration fee covers the cost of the program, dinner and the State ofI City of Golden Valley
the Region report. The fee is nonrefundable. Advance registration is required.
ta
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Independent School District 284
DAVID R. LANDSWERK, Ph.D.
Supedntendent of Schools
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 210 COUNTY ROAD 101 NORTH PO BOX 660 WAYZATA, MN 55391-9990 (612) 4763101
February 9, 1990
Dear Business Friends:
Each year the Wayzata Public Schools celebrate Pride Week in mid-
February. There are always good reasons for doing so and this
February those reasons include recent openings of Gleason Lake and
Plymouth Creek Elementary Schools, and the naming of our two junior
highs as National Schools of Excellence. In addition, you'll find
aesthetic and service improvements in all of our buildings with
special focus on recent technology installations. Most important is a
strong and continuing commitment to instructional excellence in
Wayzata classrooms.
Join us and see for yourself what is taking place in Wayzata Schools.
A Friends of Education Days sheet is enclosed, which lists open house
opportunities at all buildings. You and your staff are welcome to
participate in any of our events. If you haven't been in a Wayzata
school for a number of years, this is your opportunity to see us
busily preparing young learners for the twenty-first century.
Our district staff look forward to seeing you during "P.ride Week."
Si c rely,
David R: Lands werk
Superintendent of Schools
FEB r
(►M! Liitit�y
r• ;�.��..� ,key
Wayzata Public Schools
FRIENDS OF EDUCATION DAYS
J
Wayzata Sr. High 10:00am
J A l;�)
Tour & visit classes
Reservation required - 476-3000
Wayzata West Jr. High 9:OOam School tour & questions/answer
Session - Reservations
required
R.S.V.P. Please call -476-3180
Wayzata East Jr. High 9:OOam School tour & questions/answer
session
-R.S.V.P. Please call- Mary
Mathiason at 476-3060
Birchview 7:30am-11:30am Open House - Classroom
visitation - 9:30 am
Greenwood 9:30am-12:30pm Open House -Classroom Visitation
7
Oakwood 9:OOam-11:30am Open House - Registration 9:00
Program begins at 9:30 and
at 10:00 - Classroom visi-
tation until 11:30
R.S.V.P.-476-3140 - Dorothy
by February 15
Plymouth Creek 9:30am-2:40pm Open House
Learning Area Visitations -
Program - Format available
at school.
Gleason Lake 7:30am-9:OOam Open House
Tours of new facility
Sunset Hill
c: Principals
1-63
9:OOam-12:OOnoon Open House
Library Program/a variety
of activities will take place
MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION
1990
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
Presented at the
Annual Legislative Dinner
January 29, 1990
A
The Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC) has been in existence for six
years. As an organization of 15 suburbs representing almost 600,000 people, our
i legislative objectives have evolved as we have matured. Our purpose and focus
have become more clear with the passing of each legislative session. The goal of
the MLC as we enter the 1990s is as simple to state as it is difficult to achieve.
Our goal is Property Tax Reform.
The inequities that exist between suburban homeowners compared to non -
metro homeowners can no longer be justified. Research data, which is attached
as part of this report, reveals that the current property tax system creates
inequities based on income levels (Appendix A), based on levels of services
received (Appendix B), based on the type of housing stock (Appendix C) and
based on aids and credits received (Appendix D).
One legislative policy, perhaps the most significant policy, which creates and
perpetuates these inequities is a property tax policy which taxes homes using a
three -tiered -rate system. The value of homes over $100,000 is taxed at a rate
200% greater than the value of homes under $68,000. This system must be
changed in order to eliminate the disparities between metro and non -metro
homeowners.
I
The MLC's 1990 legislative program can be stated in one sentence. The
Legislature should adopt a property tax policy that taxes homes using a single
tax capacity rate.
i Using a single rate system, the average metro home that is twice as valuable as
the average non -metro home would pay twice the tax, not 145% more as is the
case under the current system. An average suburban home which has 150%, or
1-1/2 times, more value than an average non -metro homes would pay 150%
more property tax, not the 268% more tax under the current system. (Appendix
E).
Homestead property owners in 1990 will pay $886 million in property taxes or
28.5% of the total $3.1 billion that will be paid by all property classes. The total
market value of all homesteads in Minnesota is $69.3 billion. Rather than using
a 1%, 2%, 3% system on homes to arrive at $886 million, a flat rate of 1.28% on
I
all homes would raise the same amount of dollars. If you multiply $69.3 billion
by 1.28%, the result is $887 million. However, the MLC is not advocating a rate
of exactly 1.28%. The Legislature should determine if homes as a class are
paying too much, too little or the correct amount of property tax. The single
rate amount would then be set based on this determination.
A single rate policy would provide substantial property tax decreases on higher
valued suburban homes. (Appendix F).
This policy would also result in increases on low valued homes. The tax
capacity on a home under $68,000 in value would increase from 1 % of market
value to 1.28% of value. On the average non -metro home, the tax would
increase from $430 to $573. In order to protect low income homeowners from
this increase, the circuit breaker (property tax refund) system should be
enhanced.
It is not the intent of this single rate policy to cause property tax increases on
homeowners who cannot afford to pay additional taxes. With an enhanced
circuit breaker, the Legislature can assure that low income homeowners are
insulated from any increases.
Rather, the intent of this single rate policy is to:
1) Simplify the property tax system by making it more understandable; thus,
enhancing accountability;
2) Target state resources in a more efficient manner by providing property
tax relief to only those homeowners who need it; and
3) Reduce the disparity and eliminate the inequities between suburban and
non -metro property taxpayers.
The MLC will be concentrating its efforts in 1990 to achieve the above goals. A
single tax capacity rate on homes will be the cornerstone of property tax reform
as we begin the decade of the 1990's.
- 2 -
2 1
Appendix A
Property Taxes Paid Compared to Income Received
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROPERTY TAXES AND THE ABILITY TO PAY IS DIFFICULT TO
ESTABLISH. METRO AREA HOMEOWNERS, ON AVERAGE, PAY TWICE THE PROPERTY TAX AS NON -
METRO HOMEOWNERS EVEN THOUGH THEY RECEIVE SIMILAR INCOMES.
METRO VS.
HOUSEHOLD #OF METRO METRO #OF NON -METRO NON -METRO NON -METRO
INCOME HOMES TAX HOMES TAX TAX
$ 5,000 OR LESS 7,000 $ 421 14,600 $124 239%
$ 5,001-$15,000
49,700
$ 424
100,000
$ 223
90%
$15,001-$25,000
86,900
$ 568
92,300
$ 347
63%
$25,001-$35,000
100,000
$ 643
89,000
$ 375
72%
$35,001-$45,000
95,500
$ 661
53,600
$ 376
76%
$45,001-$55,000
63,400
$ 765
25,000
$ 464
.65%
$55,001-565,000
35,100
$ 867
10,700
$ 512
70%
$65,001-$75,000
17,000
$ 898
5,500
$ 540
66%
$75,001-$85,000
8,300
$1,215
2,800
$ 486
150%
$85,001-$95,000
6,900
$ 994
1,600
$ 883
13%
$95,0014105,000
4,900
$1,358
1,200
$ 691
97%
Over $105,000
12,500
$1,791
4,100
$ 870
106%
TOTAL 487,300
*Information for the above chart was
$ 700 400,400 $ 342
provided by the Minnesota House of Representatives Research Department.
105%
- 3 -
3
Appendix B
The Relationship Between Local Spending Decisions
and Property Taxes -Paid is Difficult to Explain
City Spending & Property Tax Comparisons
For Selected Cities In Minnesota
d
Spending is on a per capita basis
Source: Office of the State Auditor for year ending December 31, 1987
- 4 -
1989
NET
1989
1989
TOTAL
CITY
AVERAGE
AVERAGE
CITY
POP
POLICE
FIRE
PARKS
EXPEND
LEVY'
VALUE
TAX
Bemidji
11,005
$78.96
$33.09
$29.62
$539.61
$ 66
$34,600
$ 379
Brainerd
11,287
83.40
34.31
18.84
549.27
116
38,600
342
Cloquet
10,409
74.83
57.21
30.55
552.52
127
33,600
349
Virginia
9,634
104.74
116.50
74.72
1,050.72
124
30,800
272
Fergus
Falls
12,432
65.09
12.06
51.26
767.28
96
38,300
370
Hopkins
15,065
94.18
20.21
26.00
480.41
161
82,500
957
North
R
St. Paul
12,228
52.88
8.07
24.86
341.54
35
73,700
819
New Ulm
13,401
66.34
9.76
54.27
566.34
88
45,400
416
Marshall
11,698
80.61
15.68
54.03
597.32
99
51,500
525
Mounds View
13,022
48.26
10.34
23.86
281.97
45
80,400
953
Austin
22,189
87.84
65.56
36.65
508.44
107
40,900
422
New Hope
22,785
72.85
15.66
33.20
398.45
91
82,300
1,011
Hibbing
18,780
61.78
66.41
36.27
690.66
80
30,200
200
Mankato
29,470
78.48
67.00
41.67
686.63
161
54,900
592
Maplewood
28,927
81.60
30.60
27.99
521.44
131
80,600
1,062
Moorhead
30,494 ,
57.61
38.53
34.00
577.31
59
49,700
510
Shoreview
23,473
23.82
13.40
27.47
335.32
83
97,700
1,346
Willmar
17,143
64.62
21.09
35.28
839.24
79
50,800
488
New
Brighton
23,324
42.37
5.39
28.06
398.45
67
96,100
1,296
Spending is on a per capita basis
Source: Office of the State Auditor for year ending December 31, 1987
- 4 -
I
Appendix C
I
I
Because of the tiered system, Metro homes pay a disportionate share of property taxes. In many instances,
similar homes pay grossly different property taxes.
Three comparable home located in Bemidji, Eden Prairie and Minneapolis were used for this example. Each
home is identical from a structural and amenities point of view.
Each home is a 25 -year-old, three bedroom rambler
containing 1,300 square feet of space. Each home has an
unfinished basement, central air conditioning, a double
garage, fireplace and 11/2 baths.
The market value of each home was estimated by local realtors to be:
Eden Prairie $99,200
Minneapolis $84,600
Bemidji $49,600
The estimated tax in 1989 on these homes will be:
Eden Prairie $1,671
Minneapolis $1,184
Bemidji $ 588
Although the home in Eden Prairie has a market value that is exactly twice the market value of an identical home
in Bemidji, the Eden Prairie homeowner does not pay the same property tax. Nor does this homeowner pay twice
the property tax. The Eden Prairie homeowner pays 184% more property tax than the homeowner in Bemidji.
I
5 -
1
I
Appendix D
I - 6 -
AIDS AND LEVIES
VARY GREATLY WITHIN MINNESOTA
RATIO
NET TAX
.LEVIES TO
CITY POPULATION
CAPACITY
LEVIES
AIDS*
AIDS
Bemidji 11,088
462
533
682
.78
Brainerd 11,272
482
526
586
.90
Cloquet 10,444
475
716
873
.82
Virginia 9,835
292
775
1,244
.62
i
Fergus
Falls 12,370
497
543
592
.92
Hopkins 15,211
1,167
1,091
212
5.14
North
St. Paul 12,210
484
579
361
1.60
New Ulm 13,389
400
495
500
.99
Marshall 11,595
503
570
524
1.09
Mounds View 12,928
465
551
310
1.78
Austin 22,374
424
627
653
.96
New Hope 22,770
692
856
356
2.40
1
Hibbing 19,002
283
595
1,006
.59
Mankato 29,484
596
625
508
1.23
Maplewood 28,775
1,075
1,197
401
2.98
Moorhead 30,285
372
403
530
.76
Shoreview 22,560
786
863
364
2.38
Willmar 17,029
436
540
633
.85
New
Brighton 23,310
640
747
318
2.35
Spending is on a per capita basis
Source: Office of the State Auditor for year ending December 31, 1986
* Includes school foundation aid, local government aid, homestead credit, agriculture credit, taconite homestead credit and disparity :i it].
I - 6 -
Appendix E
Minnesota's Tiered System Distorts
the Property Taxes Paid on Similar Homes
Minnesota's property tax system is based upon an extremely progressive rate structure and as metro area homes
continue to increase in market value, the disparity between metro and non -metro homes will widen for the average
homeowner.
TAX CAPACITY RATES
1.0% on the first $68,000 of market value
2.0% on the next $32,000 of market value
3.0% on the excess of S100,000 of market value
In other words, any value between 568,000 and $100,000 of market value is taxed 100% more than the value under
$68,000. Any value over $100,000 is taxed 200% more than the value up to $68,000.
To use an example: The average non -metro home in 1990 will have a market value of approximately $44,000.
The average metro home's market value will be $88,000. The average west suburban home's market value will be
$110,000.
* Assuming 100% tax capacity equates to net tax paid
I
7 —
METRO MV
METRO TAX
MARKET
VS.
VS.
VALUE
TAX*
NON -ME, TRO%
NON -METRO%
NON -METRO
$ 44,000
$ 440
----
----
METRO AVE
$ 88,000
$1,080
100%
145%
SUBURB MV
SUBURB TAX
MARKET
VS.
VS.
VALUE.
TAX*
NON -METRO%
NON -METRO%
NON -METRO
S 44,000
$ 440
----
----
SUBURBS
$110,000
$1,620
150%
268%
* Assuming 100% tax capacity equates to net tax paid
I
7 —
I
M
g
I
I
Appendix F
EFFECTIVE TAX RATES ON HOMES -1990
HOME LOCATION
MARKET VALUE
NET TAX
Average Metro
$ 87,300
$1,086
Average Non -Metro
$ 44,800
$ 430
Average West Suburb
$106,200
$1,534
1/3 Above Average
$2,719
2.55
Metro
$116,100
$1,818
1/3 Above Average
Non -Metro
$ 59,500
$ 571
1/3 Above Average
West Suburb
$141,200
$2,603
Twice Average
West Suburb
$212,400
$4,847
Three Times Average
West Suburb
$318,600
$8,138
— �8_ —
EFFECTIVE TAX AT
TAX RATE 1.28%
1.24%
$1,117
.96
$ 573
1.44
$1,359
1.57
$1,486
.96
$ 762
1.84
$1,807
2.28
$2,719
2.55
$4,078
MMS
An act proposing an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution,
article X, section 1; providing for a single tax rate on
homesteads.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROPOSED.
sectionSubdivision 2L, If the amendment is ador)ted—art--icle�
- • as follows:
Section 1. Power of taxation; exemptions; legislative
powers. The power of taxation shall never be surrendered,
suspended or contracted away. Taxes shall be uniform upon the
same class of subjects and shall be levied and collected for
public purposes, but public burying grounds, public school
houses, public hospitals, academies, colleges, universities, all
seminaries of learning, all churches, church property, houses of
worship, institutions of purely public charity, and public
property used exclusively for any public purpose, shall be exempt
from taxation except as provided in this section. A single tax
rate shall apply to all residential homestead property, There
may be exempted from taxation personal property not exceeding in
value $200 for each household, individual or head of a family,
and household goods and farm machinery as the legislature
determines. .The legislature may authorize municipal corporations
to levy and The
assessments for local improvements upon
property benefitted thereby without regard to cash valuation.
The legislature by law may define or limit property exempt under
this section other than churches, houses of worship, and property
solely used for educational purposes by academies, colleges,
universities and seminaries of learning.
Sec. 2. SUBMISSION TO VOTERS.
! • - - • - • - ! ! • - - . • • • • -
rgrq.dF1
M
� MUNICIPAL
LEGIST.ATIC7E
COMMISSION
t
TO: MLC Board Of'Directors
FROM: Bob Renner
DATE: February 8, 1990
RE: Single Rate Tax
15oo Northland Plaza
3800 West 8oth Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
(612) 893-6650
Please find attached a copy of Lund vs. Hennepin county, 1987
Minnesota Supreme Court decision which ruled on a 4-3 split that
a tiered property tax rate system is constitutional.
I direct your attention, however, to the well -reasoned dissent
by Justice Yetka (page 622). Please take a few minutes to read
this dissent. It succinctly argues our position for a single
rate on homes.
Member Cities: Bloomington. Brooklyn Park. Burnsville, Eagan,
Eden Prairie, Edina, Inver Grove .Heights, Maple Grove, Maplewood. Minnetonka.
Plymouth, Roseville, Shoreview, White Bear Lake. Woodbury
LUND v. HENNEPIN COUNTY Minn. 617
Cite as 403 N.W2d 617 (Minn. 1987)
removal from disability inactive status at
In re Petition for DISCIPLINARY this time.
ACTION AGAINST Roger L.
OLDENKAMP, Respondent. )C
WEE SYSTEM
C S
No. C2-85-1329. T
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
March 26, 1987.
ORDER
WHEREAS, a petition and supplemental
petitions for disciplinary action against
Roger L. Oldenkamp have been pending in
this court since June 24, 1985; and
WHEREAS, by order filed on October
31, 1985, this court directed the immediate
transfer of the respondent to disability
inactive status as an attornevin accordance
with the respondent's request and Rule
28(b)(2), 14 iinn.R.Law.Prof.Resp.; and
WHEREAS, upon motion of the Director,
Lawyers Professional Responsibility, this
court by order filed on October 7, 1986,
remanded the matter to the referee with
instructions to determine whether the dis-
ability continues or whether the hearing on
the several petitions for disciplinary action
shall proceed; and
WHEREAS, the referee filed his findings
and recommendation that the respondent
be removed from disability inactive status
and be immediately suspended from the
practice of law pending the outcome of
disciplinary proceedings; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 1987, this court
conducted a hearing en bane on the order
to show cause filed on January 29, 1987;
and
WHEREAS, Minn.R.Law.Prof.Resp.
28(c)(1) provides that in proceedings to
transfer a lawyer from disability inactive
status counsel shall be appointed to repre-
sent the lawyer if he does not retain coun-
sel; and
WHEREAS, the respondent was not rep-
resented by a lawyer at the hearing on
March 4, 1987, and counsel was not ap-
pointed to represent him;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this
court declines to direct the respondent's
James B. LUND and Ingrid
Lund, Relators,
V.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Respondent.
No. C9-85-2106.
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
April 3, 1987.
Property owners brought certiorari to
review decison of Tax Court upholding as-
sessment of homestead property taxes.
The Supreme Court, Amdahl, C.J., held
that: (1) homestead property tax statute
did not violate equal protection or due pro-
cess; and (2) rate of taxation on owners'
property was not excessive.
Affirmed.
Yetka, J., dissented and filed opinion in
which Kelley and Wahl, JJ., joined.
Wahl, J., dissented and filed opinion.
1. Taxation x40(1)
Uniformity clause of State Constitu-
tion is no more restrictive upon state legis-
lature's power to tax or classify property
than federal equal protection clause, and
analysis under equal protection is applica-
ble to challenge under uniformity clause.
M.S.A. Const. Art. 10, § 1; U.S.C.A. Const.
Amend. 14.
2. Constitutional Law 0:-229(3)
Taxation x40(7)
Assessment of homestead property at
different graduated rates, based on reason-
able determination that estimated value of
property gave some indication of ability to
pay, did not violate equal protection.
618 Minn. 403 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES
Minn.St.1984, § 273.13, subd. 7; U.S.C.A
Const.Amend. 14.
3. Constitutional Law 4=229(2)
Taxation 0-42(1)
Homestead tax distinction between
owners and renters reflected genuine dis-
tinction between owner -occupiers and rent-
er -occupiers based on added responsibility
of homeowners and their different relation
to their property, and did not violate equal
protection. Minn.St.1984, § 273.13, subd.
7; U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14.
4. Constitutional Law 0-284(1)
Taxation 0-37.7
Homestead property tax statute which
did not arbitrarily classify subject property
and taxed all members of each class under
uniform scheme did not violate due process.
Minn.St.1984, § 273.13, subd. 7; U.S.C.A.
Const.Amend. 14.
5. Taxation 0-193
Homestead property tax statute was
classification statute and thus not an inval-
id exemption statute. Minn.St.1984, § 273.-
13,
73:13, subd. 7.
6. Taxation 0-40(1)
Use of general revenue funds to re-
place amounts reduced by homestead tax
exemption was not violative of uniformity
clause. M.S.A. § 273.13, subd. 15a; M.S.A.
Const. Art. 10, § 1.
7. Taxation 0-51
Taxation of homestead property as-
sessed at $148,800 at approximately 4.9%
was not excessive. Minn.St.1984, § 273.13,
subd. 7.
Syllabus by the Court
1. Minn.Stat. § 273.13, subd. 7 (1984)
(repealed 1985), did not violate equal pro-
I. Section 273.13, subd. 7, has been repealed and
replaced by Minn.Stat. § 273.13, subd. 22
(1986), which states:
(a) Except as provided in subdivision 23,
real estate which is residential and used for
homestead purposes is class 1. The market
value of class la property must be determined
based upon the value of the house, garage,
- and land.
-7�': 1
tection or due process clauses of the feder-
al constitution.
2. Minn.Stat. § 273.13, subd. 7, did
not violate uniformity clause of the state
constitution and did not constitute special
legislation exempting taxation.
3. Minn.Stat. § 273.13, subd. 15a
(1984), could constitutionally provide for
use of general revenue funds to replace
reductions in homestead property tax reve.
nue.
4. Rate of taxation on relators' home.
stead property is not invalid or unconstitu-
tionally excessive.
James B. Lund, Minneapolis, for relators.
Thomas L. Johnson, Co. Atty., Robert T.
Rudy, Asst. Co. Atty., Minneapolis, for re-
spondent.
Heard, considered, and decided by
the court en bane.
OPINION
AMDAHL, Chief Justice.
Relators James and Ingrid Lund petition
this court on writ of certiorari to review
the decision of the Tax Court upholding an
assessment of homestead property taxes on
relators' property. The Tax Court held
that the statutory scheme for determining
homestead property taxes is valid under
the federal and state constitutions. We
affirm.
The relevant facts are not in dispute.
Relators own homestead property in Minne-
apolis. The county assessor valued rela-
tors' property at $148,800 as of January 2,
1983. Relators' property was defined as
class 3c property under Minn.Stat. § 273.-
13,
73:13, subd. 7 (1984).' That statute provided
in part:
The first $64,000 of market value of class la
property must be assessed at 18 percent of its
market value. The homestead value of class
la property that exceeds $64,000 must be as-
sessed at 28 percent of its value.
(d) The tax to be paid on class la or class
Ib property, less any reduction received pur-
suant to sections 273.123 and 473H.10, shall
be reduced by 54 percent of the tax imposed
LUND v. HENNEPIN COUNTY Minn. 619
Cite as 403 N.Wld
'real ' �
617 (Minn. 1987)
ether the
purposes
All ' ' estate * used shalltbe
of a homestead,
tax is imposed on property,vhncome, or
has
and assessed as follows: the first
purchases of goods and services, yet
valued
$30,000 of market value shall be as-
been devised which is free of all discrimi-
at 17 percent; the next $30,000 of
natory impact. In such a complex arena
sessed
market value shall be valued and as-
in which no perfect alternatives exist, the
sessed at 19 percent; and the remaining
Court does well not to impose too rigor -
of scrutiny lest all local
market value shall be valued and as-
sessed at 30 percent. ' ' ' The proper-
ous a standard
fiscal schemes become subjects of criti-
ty tax to be paid on class 3e property ' '
cism under the Equal Protection Clause."
shall be reduced by 54 percent of the tax
411 U.S. at 41, 93 S.Ct. at 1301.
imposed on the first $67,000 of market
value. The amount of the reduction shall
not exceed $650.
Relators' property was taxed according-
ly, including a reduction of $650 from the
assessment, as statutorily provided. On
appeal to this court, relators present sever-
al constitutional challenges to the home-
stead taxing scheme. Before addressing
relators' arguments, it is important to note
the standard of review applied by this
court. Where a party challenges a statute
as unconstitutional, this court will not
strike down the statute unless "the party
challenging it demonstrates beyond a rea-
sonable doubt that the statute violates
some constitutional provision." Miller
Brewing Co. v. State, 284 N.W.2d 353, 356
(Minn.1979). As stated by the United
States Supreme Court, "those challenging
the legislative judgment must convince the
court that the legislative facts on which the
classification is apparently based could not
reasonably be conceived to be true by the
governmental decisionmaker." Vance v.
Bradley, 440 U.S. 93, 99 S.Ct. 939, 59
L.Ed.2d 171 (1979); see also Minnesota v.
Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U.S. 456,
464, 101 S.Ct. 715, 723, 66 L.Ed.2d 659
(1981). In the context of challenges to a
state taxing scheme, the United States Su-
preme Court has been especially defer-
ential. In San Antonio Indep. School
Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 93 S.Ct.
1278, 36 L.Ed.2d 16 (1973), the Court reject-
ed
ejected an equal protection challenge against an
ad valorem property tax to supplement ed-
- ucational financing. The Court stated:
on the first $68,000 of market value. The
amount of the reduction shall not exceed
$700.
[1] Relators challenge the taxing
scheme under both the equal protection
clause and article X, § 1 of the Minnesota
Constitution, commonly known as the "Uni-
formity Clause." 2 We have determined
that the state uniformity clause is no more
restrictive upon the state legislature's pow-
er to tax or classify than the federal equal
protection clause, and that an analysis un-
der equal protection is applicable to the
state constitutional challenge. See, e.g.,
Hegenes v. State, 328 N.W.2d 719, 720-21
(Minn.1983); Matter of McCannell, 301
N.W.2d 910, 916 n. 4 (Minn.1980).
[2] Relators argue first that the statute
violated equal protection because it provid-
ed for homestead property to be assessed
at different graduated rates, based on the
estimated value of the house. We find that
relators have not met the difficult burden
of proof of showing that this scheme of
taxation violated equal protection. In
Apartment Operators Assn v. City of
Minneapolis, 191 Minn. 365, 254 N.W. 443
(1934), we held a statute constitutional
which gave tax preference to homesteads
of $4,000 or less, determining that "ability
to pay may properly be taken into consider-
ation by the legislature in classifying prop-
erty for the purpose of taxation." Id. at
370, 254 N.W. at 445.
We hold that our decision in Apartment
Operators is controlling on this issue. Re-
lators provide no evidence showing that the
legislature could not have reasonably deter-
mined that market value of property gives
2. The uniformity clause requires that: 'Taxes
shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects
and shall be levied and collected for public
purposes ' " *.
620 Minn. 403 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES
some indication of the ability to pay, and
accordingly decided to tax homesteads to.
reflect market values. In the absence of
any such showing, we are compelled to
reject relators' argument.
[31 Relators also challenge the home-
stead tax based on its distinction between
owners and renters. Relators argue that
creating a preference for an owner occupi-
er over a renter occupier creates a prefer-
ence and establishes an inequality. In Mil-
1 ler Brewing, this court enunciated the test
to determine the constitutionality of statu-
tory classifications:
' (1) The distinctions which separate those
included within the classification from
i those excluded must not be manifestly
arbitrary or fanciful but must be genuine
and substantial, thereby providing a nat-
ural and reasonable basis to justify legis-
lation adapted to peculiar conditions and
needs; (2) the classification must be gen-
uine or relevant to the purpose of the
law; that is, there must be an evident
connection between the distinctive needs
peculiar to the class and the prescribed
remedy; (3) the purpose of the statute
must be one that the state can legit-
imately attempt to achieve.
284 N.W.2d at 356.
3. Relators fail to acknowledge an important dis-
tinction between homestead property and rent-
ed residential property—the rental property rep-
resents income-producing property to the own-
er. The legislature could also take this distinc.
tion into account in deciding to tax nonhome-
stead residential property differently from
homestead prop_rty.
4. The legislature has attempted to reduce the
discrepancy between property taxes paid by
owners and renters through the State of Minne-
purchase homestead property and provided
benefits to homeowners, who face greater
maintenance costs and risk of substantial
loss. The distinction between owner occu.
piers and renter occupiers is genuine, not
fanciful, in light of the added responsibili-
ties of homeowners and their different rela-
tion to the property from renters? These
distinctions justify the different tax treat.
ment between homestead owners and rent
ers a
(41 Relators also argue that the taxing
statute violates due process because it con-
stitutes "special legislation" exempting
property from taxation. We have deter-
mined that a statute is invalid as special
legislation if it arbitrarily classifies sub-
jects or if it does not "include and operate
uniformly upon all [members] of the class.
' ' ' " Duluth Banking Co. v. Koon, 81
Minn. 486, 490, 84 N.W. 335, 337 (1900). In
the present case, we have already deter-
mined that the classification of homestead
property is valid. The remaining issue is
whether the statute taxed all members of
each class under a uniform scheme. Rela-
tors have not provided any showing that
members of the same class who are similar-
ly situated are treated differently. We
therefore find that relators have not shown
beyond a reasonable doubt that Minn.Stat.
§ 273.13 violates due process.
[51 Relators next argue that the reduc-
tion in taxes for homestead owners is an
exemption and is invalid because exemp-
tions from taxation may only be made by
constitutional amendment. In Elwell v.
County of Hennepin, 301 Minn. 63, 221
N.W.2d 538 (1974), this court addressed the
validity of Minn.Stat. § 273.111, referred to
as the "green acres statute," which pro-
vides a reduced tax assessment for agri-
sota Property Tax Refund Act, Minn.Stat. ch.
290A. Under this act, both owners and renters
are eligible for property tax credits based on
household income and property tax paid. The
maximum refund under chapter 290A. is $1,125.
It is important to note that any refunds to
homestead owners under chapter 290A were
reduced by the homestead credit provided un-
der Minn.Stat. § 273.13, subd. 7. See Minn.Stat.
§ 290A.04, subd. 2b (1984).
cultural lar
ence to [t1
cultural ci
Section 27:
Hennepin t
method un
unconstitu
tally auth
that the st
ute but a c
tax reduct
was prope
was reaso
at 546. Ir
mined tha
valid. W
lenged lei
tion stat':
reasonabl
}- _
In the present case, the preference given
to homestead property "has a tendency to
encourage the use of land for homestead
purposes and is in furtherance of a sound
public policy. The stability of government
is promoted thereby." Apartment Opera-
tors, 191 Minn. at 369, 254 N.W. at 445.
The state may promote homestead owner-
ship as a legitimate goal. To achieve this
end, the legislature could have reasonably
found that reduced tax liabilities for home-
stead owners encourages individuals to
3. Relators fail to acknowledge an important dis-
tinction between homestead property and rent-
ed residential property—the rental property rep-
resents income-producing property to the own-
er. The legislature could also take this distinc.
tion into account in deciding to tax nonhome-
stead residential property differently from
homestead prop_rty.
4. The legislature has attempted to reduce the
discrepancy between property taxes paid by
owners and renters through the State of Minne-
purchase homestead property and provided
benefits to homeowners, who face greater
maintenance costs and risk of substantial
loss. The distinction between owner occu.
piers and renter occupiers is genuine, not
fanciful, in light of the added responsibili-
ties of homeowners and their different rela-
tion to the property from renters? These
distinctions justify the different tax treat.
ment between homestead owners and rent
ers a
(41 Relators also argue that the taxing
statute violates due process because it con-
stitutes "special legislation" exempting
property from taxation. We have deter-
mined that a statute is invalid as special
legislation if it arbitrarily classifies sub-
jects or if it does not "include and operate
uniformly upon all [members] of the class.
' ' ' " Duluth Banking Co. v. Koon, 81
Minn. 486, 490, 84 N.W. 335, 337 (1900). In
the present case, we have already deter-
mined that the classification of homestead
property is valid. The remaining issue is
whether the statute taxed all members of
each class under a uniform scheme. Rela-
tors have not provided any showing that
members of the same class who are similar-
ly situated are treated differently. We
therefore find that relators have not shown
beyond a reasonable doubt that Minn.Stat.
§ 273.13 violates due process.
[51 Relators next argue that the reduc-
tion in taxes for homestead owners is an
exemption and is invalid because exemp-
tions from taxation may only be made by
constitutional amendment. In Elwell v.
County of Hennepin, 301 Minn. 63, 221
N.W.2d 538 (1974), this court addressed the
validity of Minn.Stat. § 273.111, referred to
as the "green acres statute," which pro-
vides a reduced tax assessment for agri-
sota Property Tax Refund Act, Minn.Stat. ch.
290A. Under this act, both owners and renters
are eligible for property tax credits based on
household income and property tax paid. The
maximum refund under chapter 290A. is $1,125.
It is important to note that any refunds to
homestead owners under chapter 290A were
reduced by the homestead credit provided un-
der Minn.Stat. § 273.13, subd. 7. See Minn.Stat.
§ 290A.04, subd. 2b (1984).
cultural lar
ence to [t1
cultural ci
Section 27:
Hennepin t
method un
unconstitu
tally auth
that the st
ute but a c
tax reduct
was prope
was reaso
at 546. Ir
mined tha
valid. W
lenged lei
tion stat':
reasonabl
}- _
LUND v. HENNEPIN COUNTY Minn. 621
Cite as 403 N.W.2d
land "determined solely with refer-
617 (Minn. 1987)
as credits to homeowners does not violate
cultural
to [the property's] appropriate agri-
the uniformity clause of the state constitu-
ence
cultural classification and value ' ' *."
tion. Relators provide no other showing
that the use of revenue funds to
Section 273.111, subd. 4 (1986). Appellant
Hennepin County argued that the valuation
general
promote homeownership is constitutionally
method under the green acres statute was
improper.3 We therefore hold that Minn.
Stat. § 273.13, subd. 15a, validly provided
unconstitutional because it was not specifi-
cally authorized. This court determined
for use of general revenue funds to replace
that the statute was not an exemption stat
amounts reduced by the homeowners' ex-
ute but a classification statute and that the
emption.
tax reduction under the green acres statute
[7] Finally, we are presented with the
was proper if the classification of property
issue of whether there is some limit on the
was reasonable. Id. at 74-75, 221 N.W.2d
amount at which property may be taxed.
at 546. In the present case, we have deter-
For example, could the state tax a $100,000
mined that the homestead classification is
piece of property at the rate of $100,000
valid. We thus conclude that the chal-
per year? We need not determine what, if
lenged legislation is not an invalid exemp-
any, upper limit exists on property taxes.
tion statute but instead a statute which
In the present case, the record indicates
reasonably classifies property.
that relators' property was taxed at ap-
Th' to of taxation is
[6] Relators also challenge the use of
general revenue funds to replace home-
stead tax reductions. Minn.Stat. § 273.13,
subd. 15a (1984), provided for payment
from the general fund for the purpose of
replacing revenue lost as a result of the
reduction in property taxes provided under
subdivisions 6, 7, and 14a of the statute.
Relators argue that such use of general
revenue funds is improper. We disagree.
In Village of Burnsville v. Onischuk,
301 Minn. 137, 222 N.W.2d 523 (1974), ap-
peal dismissed, 420 U.S. 916, 95 S.Ct. 1109,
43 L.Ed.2d 388 (1975), we determined
whether Minn.Stat. ch. 473F (1974), the
"Metropolitan Fiscal Disparities Act," vio-
lated the state constitution. Chapter 473F
pooled commercial property taxes collected
in a seven -county area and redistributed
them in a manner which provided more
funds to areas with less commercial devel-
opment than had been collected from them.
We found the statute did not violate the
state constitutional requirement for uni-
formity of taxes. Id. at 153-54, 222
N.W.2d at 532-33.
Applied to the taxing scheme at issue,
Onischuk indicates that distribution of
general revenue funds in varying amounts
5. In fact, several other property classes receive
tax relief through general revenue funds, includ-
ing agricultural homestead property, Minn.Stat.
§ 273.13, subd. 23 (1986); homestead structures
proximately is ra
clearly not excessive.
In summary, we hold that relators have
not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that
the homestead property taxing scheme vio-
lates either the state or federal constitu-
tion.
Affirmed.
WAHL, Justice (dissenting).
I have reexamined Apartment Opera-
tors Assn v. City of Minneapolis, 191
Minn. 365, 254 N.W. 443 (1934) in light of
Justice Yetka's dissent and have concluded
that our decision there does not control our
decision in this case as to whether Minn.
Stat. § 273.13, subd. 7 (1984) violates the
equal protection clause of the fourteenth
amendment of the United States Constitu-
tion and article X, § 1, the uniformity
clause of the Minnesota Constitution.
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 359, enacted in
1933, did not, in fact, provide for a system
of two classifications of homesteads with
value assessed on a graduated scale.
Rather the legislature created, for the first
time, a homestead exemption, one home-
stead exemption, for the purpose of real
property taxation. For both class 3b un -
located on property not owned by the occupant,
Minn.Stat. § 273.124, subd. 7(a) (1986); and
state paid wetlands, Minn.Stat. § 273.115
(1986).
�—
n
t
i
622 Minn. 403 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES
platted real estate and class 3c platted reE
estate, the first $4,000 of true and fu;
value constituted the homestead exeml
tion. This exemption, as Justice Yetka ha
suggested, would have covered all home;
which today would be valued up to and we]
in excess of $100,000. In both classes o'.
property, unplatted and platted, under tho
1933 act, the value of real estate used fol
homestead purposes which exceeded $4,00
was assessed and taxed as non -homestead
property at the rate applicable to each clan
for property unaffected by the exemption
In contrast, ,under Minn.Stat. § 273.13
subd. 7, the homestead exemption afforded
class 3c real property is divided into three
classifications according to the value of the
homestead and assessed at a graduated
rate. In my view, such a scheme does not
comport with the constitutional mandate
that taxes must be "uniform on the same
class of subjects." "Ability to pay," as
used by the Apartment Operators court,
referred to the ability of homeowners own-
ing a homestead of greater value than that
afforded by the exemption to pay the high-
er non -homestead rate for the remaining
value. It did not give constitutional ap-
proval for graduated rates within the
homestead exemption itself.
I join the dissent of YETKA, J.
KELLEY, Justice (dissenting).
I join the dissents of YETKA and
WAHL, JJ.
YETKA, Justice (dissenting).
ti s on 1 of the Minnesota
Constitution ru
e ires taxes to a um orm
_!Lon the same class of su pec • "
Because I find that langua�e to a clear
and unambiguous and because all owners
of hOme�arl nronarty r nstiti e a sinele
class I Nyould find that a tax that attem is
to assess different homeowners at differ-
ent rates violates the aforesaid_ provision.
The history of the adoption of our United
States and Minnesota Constitutions reveals
that our founding fathers were intent on a
written document which defined the pow-
ers given to the government by the people.
The founders wished to remind future gen-
erations that all people have certain inalien-
able rights; that constitutional documents
limited the exercise of power, as well as
delegated it; and that those powers not
delegated to the government remained with
the people. Article X, section I was clearly
intended to be a limitation on the power to
tax.
0 noYou are either a homeowner or you are
t. Realistically, it cannot be said that
homeowners who are assessed at one rate
s if their homes are worth $30,000, another
at $60,000 and a third if over $60,000 are
taxed by laws "uniform upon the same
class of subjects." I think the majority
opinion misinterprets this court's decision
in Apartment Operators Assn v. City of
Minneapolis, 191 Minn. 365, 254 N.W. 443
(1934). That case was decided in the midst
of the Great Depression when the legisla-
ture felt compelled to limit real estate tax-
es in order to protect people's homes. The
legislature decided that the value of home-
steads up to $4,000 would be assessed at a
lower rate, but that all value greater than
$4,000 would be assessed as non -homestead
property. The legislature has always had
the right to define what a homestead is and
that's all it did in Apartment Owners.
Any other language was unnecessary to
decide that case and is pure dicta. Be-
cause of the method used in arriving at
assessed valuation and because of the infla-
tion over the past half century, a home
with an assessed valuation of $4,000 in 1933
might be equal to a home worth well in
excess of $100,000 today. Thus, if the
legislature adopted a statute defining a
homestead as a home not exceeding $100,-
000 and taxed it at a lower rate than other
real estate, we would have the situation
presented in Apartment Operators.
The pertinent language of the current
article X, section 1 was adopted in 1906 in
what was then article IX, section 1 of the
state constitution. Minn. Const. of 1857,
art. IX, § 1(1906). Prior to 1906, article IX,
section 1 provided that taxes be "nearly
equal as may be, and all property on which
taxes are to be levied shall have a cash
valuation and be equalized and uniform
throughout the state." Minn. Const. of
.ien-
!nts
as
not
rith
Irly
.to
are
hat
ate
?ier
are
me
ity
,on
Of
43
lst
]a-
tx-
he
ie -
a
in
3d
id
;d
s
:o
e -
it
a-
n
a
LUND v. HENNEPIN COUNTY Minn. 623
Cite" 403 N.W.2d 617 (Minn. 19M
1857, art. 9, § 1. It is clear that the 1906 home is a luxury on which they lavish a
amendment gave the legislature greater disportionate part of their income and
latitude, but it is also noteworthy that the wealth. For others, it is merely a necessi-
new amendment retained in the constitu- ty, a place to go to and spend as little time
tion the restriction that taxes should be as possible. Two persons could work at
"uniform upon the same class of subjects." the same place of business and have identi-
Clearly, the amendment was not intended cal incomes; yet, one might own a home
�n allow the progressive taxation of proper- worth $30,000 and the other $100,000.
t„x.. The Sixteenth Amendment to the Unit- Quite naturally, at the same rate of tax,
ed States Constitution only became effec- the $100,000 home would pay more, but
tive in 1913, and, prior to its adoption, it why should the rate be higher too?
was assumed that a progressive income tax
was impermissible. Minnesota itself did
not adopt an income tax until 1933. Those
drafting the 1906 amendment could not
have contemplated taxing real estate in a
manner not even then allowed for income.
A property tax is entirely different from
an income tax. The Jatter is, quite rightly,
a progressive tax, with both the amount
and the rate of the tax risine with income
and, thus, the ability to pay. The property
tax on the other hand, is a so-called ad
valorem tax, a tax according tom. If a
tax of 157 were levied against the value of
property, the net tax in dollar amounts
might differ on different parcels of land,
but the percentage of the tax would still be
the same and would be an equal burden
according to the property's value. There-
fore, if real estate had a $50,000 value, leo
would yield a $500 tax and a $100,000 par-
cel of real estate would have a tax of
$1,000: The rate is the same, but the bur-
den is based on value.
However, the law which is the subject of
this litigation assessed the first $30,000 of
property at 1770, the second $30,000 at 1970
and all value over $60,000 at 309o'. The
result could mean a net tax on a $120,000
home would be not just double that of a
$60,000 home, but over three times as
much. That would be so because the base
value against which the mill levy is made
rises progressively.
It may be true that there is some overall
relationship between the value of a per-
son's home and his or her ability to pay
taxes. However, i the extremes of simple
hovels and wealthy mansions were exclud-
ed, it is also true that, in very many cases,
there is no relationship at all. For some, a
The court, in Apartment Operators, in
upholding putting homesteads in two classi-
fications, said: "Placing homesteads in two
classes on the basis of valuation was within
the scope of the broad power of the legisla-
ture to classify property for the purpose of
taxation." Id, 191 Minn. at 370, 254 N.W.
at 445. The majority opinion, in a footnote,
points out that the legislature has appar-
ently gone back to this two -class scheme,
but this does not end the issue. Lund v.
County of Hennepin, 403 N.W.2d 617, 618
n. 1, (Minn.1987). If we uphold this scheme
of taxation, there is nothing to prevent an
even more progressive scheme from being
adopted in the future. Envision an even
more serious scenario: Suppose the legisla-
ture were to decide on a regressive scale,
that is, reverse the tax structure here and
assess all homes at the rate of 300 on the
first $30,000; 1970 on the second $30,000
and 1776 over $60,000. The deputy attor-
ney general at oral argument, when
presented with that question, argued that,
while the legislature could tax property
progressively, it could not adopt a regres-
sive scale because that would be unfair,
unreasonable and perhaps unconstitutional;
yet, he could offer no legal authority as to
why it would be unconstitutional. In my
mind, if the legislature can do the one, it
can do the other. The constitution is there
to protect all, rich and poor alike, and that
is precisely why it was written as it was.
The state argued further that, if the
principles of this dissent were to be
adopted, the result would be a loss in tax
revenues, and should the legislature try to
prevent such a loss, an increase in taxes on
real estate of lower value would occur
while those on expensive real estate would
624 Minn. 403 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES
j decrease. (The state's argument is one
heard more and more frequently in this
court and is best illustrated by this syllo-
gism: This court's decision could have
drastic consequences. Drastic conse-
quences do, in fact, follow the court's deci-
sion; ergo, it was the decision of the court
that caused the consequences.) The state's
argument is fallacious. It is so, first, be-
cause it assumes that the legislature would
{ not be willing to assume a loss in revenue
from a tax structure found to be invalid
• and, second, that there is no other way to
reduce real estate taxes than by means of
the very complicated tax assessment and
i classification system adopted in this state.
1
I will take the unusual step of outlinine
several things that the legislature can do to
reduce the burden on all real estate. I do
this not as an undertaking to offer alterna-
tive solutions, but simply because I believe
that, all too frequently, criticism is directed
at the courts for causing problems by its
decisions without outlining solutions to
those problems. We are reluctant not be-
cause we. are without ideas, but simply
because, in the constitutional scheme of
separation of powers, it is the legislative
branch which is given the power to tax and
appropriate money. However, we are in a
position to understand the legal and judicial
systems.
In light of the language both in article X,
section 1, which is the subject of this litiga-
tion, and article I, section 8 of our constitu-
tion,' the legislature might well consider
more state funding of the courts and the
criminal justice system as a whole. Why
should local units of government—many
impoverished—pay' for the entire cost of
public prosecution for crime and the state
public defender system? Moreover, why
should a poor rural county be expected to
pick up the entire cost for prosecuting a
notorious criminal merely because the
crime was committed in that county? Un-
doubtedly, similar arguments could 'be
made for public education given the consti-
tutional guarantee of a "general and uni-
t. "Every person is entitled to a certain remedy
in the laws for all injuries or wrongs which he
may receive to his person, property or charac-
ter, and to obtain justice freely and without
form" system of public schools contained in
article XIII, section 1 of our constitution.
If the state were to assume greater fund-
ing in these areas, all real estate taxes
could be reduced.
The majority states that, in this case.
relator's property was taxed -atmly.4.9%
of market value and goes on to hold th t
that rate of taxation is clearly not exces-
sive. I disa>rree. I believe it is onerous
and unreasonable. Under the presents s-
tem, relator's property pays ar more for
governmental services than other parcel
which require more of those same services
but pay much less in taxes. Some property
owners in this state may pay as little as 1%
of market value in real estate taxes. Rela-
tor pays five times more. Is that reason-
able? Moreover, here, the owner will not
only pay the purchase price of his property,
but also pay for the property again in the
form of taxes in the next 20 years if taxed
at his present rate of nearly 5% per year of
market value. An owner of real estate
who pays more than twice for his property
over the life expectancy of the improve-
ments thereon should be found to suffer a
burden invoking constitutional concerns.
The other issues dealt with in the majori-
ty opinion were not adequately briefed nor
argued even -though the court specifically
called for amicus briefs from a number of
organizations. Thus, I do not believe the
court's opinion should be firm precedent
thereon.
I believe the taxpayer in this case has a
legitimate complaint. If the constitutional
phrase, "equal on the same class of sub-
jects," is to mean anything, let us apply it;
otherwise, we will return to those days
prior to 1776 when we were a nation not of
laws, but of men. The Constitution of the
United States and that of the State of
Minnesota constitute an island in the fast
stream of life—mostly a totalitarian life. I
fear that opinions of the courts which do
not impose a strict construction of the
clauses in the constitutions which protect
purchase, completely and without denial,
promptly and without delay, conformable to the
laws." Minn. Const. art. 1, § 8.
individua
allow thr
until it c
Ninete
ebrate i
States C
annivers:
tional co:
year tha
constitut
WAHI
I join
KELL'
I join
WAHL,
JC
CNA
St
Inst.
to be re
made in
tion sui
County,
judgmer
ed. The
affirmec
preme C
summar
previous
tion thai
timely n
challeng
tice was
responsi
JOSTENS, INC. v. CNA INS./CONTINENTAL CAS. Minn. 625
Cite u 403 N.Wid W (Min., 1987)
individuals from unreasonable ode away to indemnifyation will amounting insured forrremain ng amount
and insurer had
allow that island of freedom
until it ceases to exist. of class action settlement under terms of
Nineteen eighty-seven is the year we cel- umbrella excess liability policies; and (3)
ebrate the bicentennial of our United prejudgment interest was to be paid by
States Constitution. It is also the 130th er from date damages were paid by
usur
insured to settle Title VII suit, rather than
anniversary of Minnesota s first constitu- date insured first supplied insurer with in-
tional convention in 1857. It should be the formation to calculate amount of settle -
year that the rights guaranteed by these policies.
ment payments covered under the
constitutions are enhanced. I thus dissent. firmed in part, reversed in part.
WAHL, Justice (dissenting).
I join the dissent of YETKA, J.
KELLEY, Justice (dissenting).
I join the dissents of YETKA and
WAHL, JJ.
w
p SKEYNUMBFRSYSTEM
T
JOSTENS, INC., Respondent,
V.
CNA INSURANCE/CONTINENTAL
CASUALTY COMPA-NY,
Petitioner, Appellant.
No. C6-86-2.
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
April 3, 1987.
1. Insurance x514.8
Lack of notice is an affirmative de-
fense of insurer to its duty to defend and
indemnify insured.
2. Insurance x533
Requirement that insured provide in-
surer with notice of underlying claim is
intended to provide insurer with opportuni-
ty for prompt investigation so as to protect
itself against invalid and fraudulent claims
and determine disposition of claim by set-
tlement or defense.
Insured brought action against insurer
to be reimbursed for settlement payments
made in separate Title VII sex discrimina-
tion suit. The District Court, Ramsey
County, Joseph P. Summers, J., entered
judgment for insured, and insurer appeal-
ed. The Court of Appeals, 386 N.W.2d 257,
affirmed, and insurer appealed. The Su-
preme Court, Amdahl, C.J., held that: (1)
summary affirmance by Supreme Court on
previous appeal of trial court's determina-
tion that insured had provided insurer with
timely notice of underlying claim precluded
challenge on this appeal that insured's no-
tice was not proper; (2) insured was solely
responsible for pre and postpolicy damages
3. Insurance x540
In determining whether insured has
satisfied clause of policy requiring immedi-
ate notice of underlying claim, notice re-
quirement should be construed liberally
against insured and strictly against insur-
er.
4. Insurance x539.2
Immediate notice to insurer of underly-
ing claim need only be reasonably prompt
under all the circumstances to give rise to
insurer's duty to defend and indemnify its
insured.
5. Insurance 0=514.8
Trial court must determine if insured
has met all notice requirements as condi.
tion precedent to determining whether in-
surer has duty to defend or indemnify in-
sured on underlying claim.
6. Insurance 8=514.8
Trial court, in determining that insurer
had duty to defend insured on underlying
claim, also necessarily determined that in-
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: February 12, 1990
TO: Chief Richard J. Carlquist
FROM: Darrel Anderson
SUBJECT: D.A.R.E. GRADUATION EXERCISES
Culmination dates for D.A.R.E. students in Wayzata and
Robbinsdale District schools have been set as follows:
- Zachary Lane Elementary
43.50 Zachary Lane
Officer Craig Lindman
- Greenwood Elementary
3635 Co Rd. No. 101
Officer Susan Gottwald
- Gleason Lake Elementary
310 Co. Rd. No. 101
Officer Greg Oly
- Pilgrim Lane Elementary
3725 Pilgrim Lane
Officer Karen Forslund
05/17/90 2:00 p.m.
05/23/90 2:00 p.m.
05/25/90 2:00 p.m.
05/31/90 1:30 p.m.
The officer will speak at this ceremony and there will also be a
guest speaker, probably a sports star.
We would like -you to be present at each school if possible and
speak for 3-5 minutes.
We would also appreciate having at least one Councilmember
present on stage to congratulate the kids as they receive their
_diplomas. I would like you to make this request of the Council
at your earliest convenience.
DA/sb
.OUTH POLICE DEPT.
.SE AINUIDENT
-,3
SUPPLEMENTARY/CONTINUATION REPORT
/3 ge
75
cj
Ive
Ar
2/9/90
Dan -Bar Homes
4430 Glacier Ln. N.
Plymouth, Mn. 55446
Attn: Dan Bartus
CITY OF
PLYMOUTH+
Z
Mr. Bartus,
This notice is to inform you, the property owner and/or
occupant, that the Department of Public Safety is investigating
a condition which exists on your property that constitutes a
public nuisance. An inspection of the -premises was made by a
Community- Service Officer who observed a violation of the
Plymouth City Code 2010.01, Nuisances. A copy of this ordinance
is provided for your reference.
Please find enclosed with this letter a public nuisance
inspection -report which details the specific violations that
were observed on the premises. We request that you make the
necessary changes to comply with the city ordinance before the
indicated reinspection date.
If you have any questions, please contact the Plymouth Police
Department at 559-2800. Thank you for your cooperation in this
matter.
Sincerely,
StevenlCorrel ervices Supervisor
PLY,kOUTH P CE DEPARTMENT
John S' r
rBy�:iniusnius
mmunity Se vice Officer
JS: kb
3400 PLYMICUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
tp
=-3
City of Plymouth
11epa rtment of Public Safety
PUBLIC NUISANCE REPORT
DATE 2/9/90
TO Dan -Bar Homes
430 Glacier Ln. N.
Plymouth, MN. 55446
RE: Property located at:
14505 44th Ave. N. Plymouth, MN
INSPECTION DATE: 1/30/90
OBSERVATIONS: The following violations were observed:
Junk & debris( lumber and other Misc. building Materials), brush,
and what appears to be a tree house on the south end of the lot.
NECESSARY CHANGES: The following changes need to be nuisamade before the reinspection
date in order to abate
Remove all the rubbish from the lot including the brush, building
materials and the treehouse.
REINSPECTION
Thank -you!
OFFICE
Ez 12/28/90
ar lce icer
__..- ivry bHEET - i
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: February 4, 1pgn
TO: Chuck Dil a ommunity
FROM: Myrai acz, Development
Development Coordinator I, /
Services Technician Vt
SUBJECT: INTERSECTION SIGHT OBSTRUCTION
Upon inspection of the reported sight obstructions, I found that the
intersection of Berkshire Lane and County Road 9 has no sight obstruction at
this time. However, at one time there was a small bush on the southeast
corner of Annapolis Lane and County Road 9, which was removed by City
Forester, Don Kissinger.
The other reported sight obstruction was somewhere along Vicksburg Lane,
between Gleason Lake Drive and County Road 6. Upon inspection of this street,
I found a sight obstruction on the southeast corner of 6th Avenue and
Vicksburg Lane. The homeowner was sent a letter on December 15, 1989, and
given 30 days to comply. On January 15, 1990, City Forester, Don Kissinger,
reinspected the intersection and determined that the sight obstruction had
been removed per code requirements.
There was an additional sight obstruction brought to my attention today along
Plymouth Road or Xenium Lane and Carlson Parkway. Based on the guidelines of
the City Code, I found no sight obstruction at Xenium and Sunset Trail or
Xenium and 5th Avenue.
(nu/mw/150:dl)
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: January 25, 1990
TO: Dale Hahn
FROM: Darrel Anderson
SUBJECT: FALSE ALARM PERMIT, INVOICE NO. 2502 FOR 1989
I received a phone call from Wilbur Haberman, 12030 28th Avenue
North, regarding the above invoice in the amount of $75.00 for
having a false alarm. Mr. Haberman first stated that he wasn't
aware of the alarm ordinance; however, I found that Mr. Haberman
had filled out a registration for his alarm system in 1988 and
had also paid a $50.00 permit fee as a result of a false alarm on
01/12/89 in the amount of $50.00.
The second alarm in question occurred on 10/19/89 and was caused
by his cleaning lady. He didn't feel that he should have to pay
this bill and try to collect the money from his cleaning lady for
setting off the alarm. After some discussion and an explanation
of why we have an alarm ordinance, Mr_ Haberman advised me that
he did not agree with the alarm ordinance or the need for one;
and he would not be paying the $75.00 invoice billed to him on
10/24/89, and asked me what the repercussions were.
At this time, I advised him that if the permit fee were not paid,
his permission to operate the alarm system in the City would be
revoked and that if -he operated his alarm system from then on, he
would be charged with a misdemeanor. Mr. Haberman felt that this
would be necessary to go through the court system on this matter
in order to protest the ordinance and determine its validity.
At this time, I feel you may regard the $75.00 permit fee as
uncollectable and the Police Department will issue Mr. Haberman a
letter revoking his alarm permit.
DA.ct
cc: Chief Carlquist
CSO J. Sigfrinius
MMUNICIPAL
L LEGISLATIC7E
COMMISSION
LE _76,-,
150o Northland Plaza
3800 West 80th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
(612) 893-6650
TWENTY—EIGHTH MLC BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
Monday, January 29, 1990
5:00 p.m.
Tabone Room
Decathlon Athletic Club
7800 Cedar Avenue South
Bloomington, Minnesota
The Twenty -Eighth MLC Board of Directors meeting was called to
order by Mayor Daniel McElroy, Chairman.
Members present: Craig Rapp, Brooklyn Park; Linda Barton,
Burnsville; Mayor Tom Egan and Tom Hedges, Eagan; Carl Jullie,
Eden Prairie; Mayor William Saed, Inver Grove Heights;
Councilmember Don Ramstad and Jon Elam, Maple Grove; Mike
McGuire, Maplewood; Jim Miller, Minnetonka; Steve Sarkozy,
Roseville; Councilmember Ben Withhart and Dwight Johnson,
Shoreview; Mayor Jerry Briggs and Mark Sather, White Bear Lake;
Mayor Daniel Guider and Barry Johnson, Woodbury.
Also present: Ceil Smith, Edina; John Olinger, Minnetonka; Bob
Renner, Jr., and Heather'Florine, Messerli & Kramer.
Members Absent: Mayor Neil Peterson and John Pidgeon,
Bloomington; Mayor James Krautkremer, Brooklyn Park; Mayor Gary
Peterson, Eden Prairie; Mayor Frederic Richards and Ken Rosland,
Edina; Robert Schaefer, Inver Grove Heights; Gary Bastian,
Maplewood; Mayor Tim Bergstedt, Minnetonka; Lloyd Ricker and
James Willis, Plymouth; Vernon Johnson, Roseville.
A motion was made by Guider, seconded by McGuire and unanimously
passed to accept the Minutes from the September 26, 1989, Board
of Directors Meeting.
Member Cities: Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Burnsville, Eagan,
Eden Prairie, Edina. Inver Grove Heights, Maple Grove, Maplewood. Minnetonka,
Plymouth, Roseville, Shoreview, White Bear Lake. Woodbury
Jullie then presented the Treasurer's Report. A motion was made
by Elam, seconded by Miller and unanimously passed to accept the
Treasurer's Report.
Renner then distributed and explained updated reports comparing
major State aids and taxes and city LGA and equalization aid in
per capita amounts.
The Board then discussed the 1990-1991 MLC Public Relations plan
arising from the ad hoc Public Relations Committee meeting.
The MLC will be directing its efforts toward public education
and introducing a bill in the 1990 session advocating a flat
rate property tax system. Although the legislature is unlikely
to adopt such a plan in the 1990 legislative session, it will be
on the table for discussion and could potentially become an
issue in the 1990 elections.
A motion was made by Guider, seconded by Saed and unanimously
passed to accept the 1990-1991 MLC Pubic Relations Plan with the
changes incorporated into it by the Operating Committee.
The Board then discussed the 1990 Legislative Program which will
focus specifically on a flat rate tax system. The MLC will
narrow its focus on the inequities in property taxes paid
between metropolitan and outstate Minnesota cities and will
draft and introduce a bill in the 1990 session advocating a flat
rate property tax system. The MLC will emphasize, however,
that an enhanced circuit breaker would be necessary to insulate
low income homeowners from increases in their property taxes
which they would be would be unable to afford.
A motion was made by Saed, seconded by Guider and unanimously
passed to accept the 1990 Legislative Program.
Finally, the renewal of the MLC's contract with Messerli &
Kramer was recommended to the Board. A motion was made by Elam,
seconded by Guider and passed unanimously to renew the MLC's
contract with Messerli & Kramer for 1990 legislative
consultation.
The next MLC Board Meeting was set for Wednesday, May 2, 1990,
at 5:00. The meeting place will be determined at a future date.
A motion was made by Saed, seconded by Jullie and passed
unanimously to adjourn the MLC Twenty -Eighth Board Meeting. The
meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
The Annual Legislative Dinner followed the Board Meeting.
- 2 -
LC MUNICIPAL
LEGISLATIVE
COMMISSION
1500 Northland Plaza
3800 West 80th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
(612) 893-6650
SEVENTY-NINTH MLC OPERATING COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, January 29, 1990
3:00 p.m.
Tabone Room
Decathlon Athletic Club
7800 Cedar Avenue South
Bloomington, Minnesota
The Seventy -Ninth MLC Operating Committee Meeting was called to
order by Dwight Johnson, MLC Vice Chairman.
Members present: John Pidgeon, Bloomington; Craig Rapp,
Brooklyn Park; Linda Barton, Burnsville; Tom Hedges, Eagan; Carl
Jullie, Eden Prairie; Jon Elam, Maple Grove; Mike McGuire,
Maplewood; Jim Miller, Minnetonka; Steve Sarkozy, Roseville;
Mark Sather, White Bear Lake; Barry Johnson, Woodbury.
Also present: Ceil Smith, Edina; John Olinger, Minnetonka;
Mayor Daniel Guider, Woodbury; Bob Renner, Jr., and Heather
Florine, Messerli & Kramer.
Members Absent: Ken Rosland, Edina; Robert Schaefer, Inver Grove
Heights; James Willis, Plymouth.
A motion was made by Hedges, seconded by Jullie and passed
unanimously to approve the Minutes of the January 10, 1990,
Operating Committee Meeting.
Jullie presented the Treasurer's Report.
A motion was made by Miller, seconded by Sarkozy and passed
unanimously to approve the Treasurer's Report.
Member Cities: Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Bumsville, Eagan,
Eden Prairie, Edina, Inver Grove Heights, Maple Grove, Maplewood, Minnetonka,
Plymouth, Roseville, Shoreview, White Bear Lake, Woodbury
.�; -1 0.i
Renner then distributed and explained the 1990 Hennepin County
property tax statement form. After further discussion regarding
the form, it was suggested that MLC cities may want to send
explanations via first class mail or city newsletters to
residents explaining how each line on the form is calculated:
The Operating Committee then discussed a memorandum from the
Citizens League regarding Tax Increment Financing. Renner
informed the Operating Committee that the Senate is less likely
to make changes in TIF policy than the House. Representative
Ann Rest is planning to introduce legislation which would make
changes in Minnesota's TIF policy making it more restrictive and
• difficult to use.
Options discussed by the Operating Committee included possibly
leaving a veto option up to the County or School Districts for
all proposed TIF projects, perhaps on captured valued above a
set percentage of assessed value. Another possibility might be
in redefining and strengthening the "but for" test; thereby,
making it an absolute measurement. The ultimate objective would
be a cap on the percentage of TIF of total assessed value.
It was the general consensus of the Operating Committee to wait
and see what position the League of Minnesota Cities and
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities take and discuss Tax
Increment Financing again at the February 14 Operating Committee
meeting.
The Operating Committee then discussed the projected budget
shortfall for the State of Minnesota. Renner informed the
Committee that a new projection is due the end of February, and
it has been suggested the shortfall may increase to somewhere in
the $220 million range. Legislative leadership has expressed
that instead of increasing taxes in the 1990 session, the
legislature will most likely split the difference between funds
set aside in the budget reserve and program cuts which could
include 1990 HACA and LGA.
Additionally, Renner informed the Operating Committee that the
legislature is considering proposing a $.01 sales tax in the
seven -county metropolitan area to be directed toward a dedicated
transportation fund which would include light rail transit.
This would raise approximately $194 million annually in
additional revenue. After further discussion, the Operating
Committee suggested possibly supporting a provision in this
proposal which would allow for revenues from this fund to also
be allocated toward local transportation efforts. The Operating
Committee agreed that it would oppose transferring revenue from
the fiscal disparities fund or property taxes to fund light rail
transit.
- 2 -
_L —1
The Operating Committee then discussed the MLC's 1990
legislative program which will advocate a flat rate property tax
system for homesteads. Under the proposed program, the MLC
would draft and introduce a bill designed specifically to
implement a flat rate system. The MLC will, however, leave the
exact rate up to the legislature to determine if homes as a
class are paying too much, too little, or the correct amount of
property tax. The single rate amount would then be based upon
this determination and be applied against all homesteads.
The MLC would emphasize, however, that an enhanced circuit
breaker would be necessary to insulate low income homeowners
from increases in'their property taxes which they would be would
be unable to afford.
A motion was made by Barton, seconded by Miller and passed
unanimously to recommend to the Board adoption of the 1990
Legislative Program.
The Operating Committee then discussed the 1990-1991 Public
Relations Program which was distributed to the Committee. In
addition to the recommended program, a motion was made by
Jullie, seconded by Miller and unanimously passed to incorporate
the following amendments as part of the Public Relations
Program.
1) MLC will establish a speakers bureau which would use City
Managers, Councilmembers and Mayors to speak at various
functions to increase the awareness of the MLC's
legislative program.
2) The MLC will incorporate a candidate orientation program
into the annual legislative breakfast meetings prior to
election which would include all legislative candidates,
both incumbents and challengers, in order to inform the
candidates of the MLC's legislative positions.
A motion was made by Sather, seconded by Rapp and unanimously
passed to recommend to the Board adoption of the 1990-1991
Public Relations Program as amended.
Finally, the last item on the agenda was the renewal of the
MLC's contract with Messerli & Kramer to continue as legislative
counsel to the MLC.
Sather and Johnson reported on the
Renner and summarized the direction
last six years.
- 3 -
evaluation meeting with
the MLC has taken in the
After further discussion, a motion was made by Sather, seconded
by Jullie and unanimously passed to recommend to the Board
approval of renewal of the MLC's contract with Messerli &
Kramer.
The next MLC Operating Committee was set for Wednesday, February
14, 1990, at the Messerli & Kramer Board Room at 3:00 p.m.
A motion was made by Jullie, seconded by Sarkozy and unanimously
passed to adjourn the meeting. The Seventy-Ninth.MLC Operating
Committee meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
- 4 -
--1b
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1990
The Regular Meeting of the City of Plymouth Planning
Commission was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Plufka, Commissioners
John Wire, Hal Pierce, Dennis Zylla, Joy
Tierney, Larry Marofsky, and Michael
Stulberg.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Coordinator Charles Dillerud, City
Engineer Dan Faulkner, and Sr.
Clerk/Typist Denise Lanthier.
IR ---al
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Zylla, to approve the Minutes for the January 10, 1990,
Planning Commission Meeting, subject to the changes noted by
staff in a memorandum dated January 19, 1990, which consist
of the following:
On Page 2, paragraph 2, the acres stated in the first
sentence should be 30, not 60.
On Page 2, paragraph 12, the word "not" should be inserted
after the word "does".
Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried.
Chairman Plufka introduced the request of the City of
Plymouth for a Site Plan and Variance to construct a new
Fire Station at the location of the existing Fire Station
No. 1 located at 13205 County Road 6.
Coordinator Dillerud gave an overview of the January 16,
1990, staff report.
Commissioner Zylla asked Fire Chief Robinson what the size
is of the existing fire station.
Fire Chief Robinson responded that the existing fire station
is 4,000 square feet and the proposed fire station is 8,000
square feet.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
CITY OF PLYMOUTH (89114)
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 11
Commissioner Zylla asked Fire Chief Robinson if the City was
improving on a nonconforming situation.
Fire Chief Robinson responded that the existing fire station
is in conformance except for the south side where there is
an encroachment of the structure into the street setback.
Commissioner Marofsky asked Fire Chief Robinson if 16th
Avenue South has been vacated, and if it has, does it show
it on the Site Plan as a part of the site.
Fire Chief Robinson responded affirmatively, and stated that
there was no other land available to build another fire
station in this area. He further stated that Trossen Wright
Architects have done an excellent job fitting the proposed
fire station into the existing fire station parcel.
Commissioner Marofsky asked why the staff report of January
16 did not address the 6 deferred parking spaces as stated
in a letter from Trossen Wright Architects.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that, physically, more spaces
could be added, but that the 6 -space deficiency is better
treated as a variance since any additional spaces would be
in setback areas.
Mr. Mike Trossen of Trossen Wright Architects stated that
every fire fighter will have a parking space.
Commissioner Pierce asked staff how they came up with the
figures for parking.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that there is one stall for
each 350 square feet of floor area, which is the same as
Fire Station No. 3.
Chairman Plufka asked for public input to this request.
Rod Dallin of 12400 50th Avenue North asked what the time
frame was before the new fire station would be built.
Fire Chief Robinson responded that it would be 6-8 months
before Fire Station No. 1 will be in operation.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commission Pierce, MOTION TO APPROVE
to recommend approval of the request by the City of Plymouth
for a Site Plan and Variances to construct a new fire
station at the location of the existing Fire Station No. 1
located at 13205 County Road 6, subject to the conditions
set forth in the staff report of January 16, 1990, including
the Variances.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 12
Chairman Plufka introduced the request by Medicine Lake MEDICINE LAKE LUTHERAN
Lutheran Church for a Rezoning, Site Plan, Conditional Use CHURCH (89086)
Permits, and Variance to construct a place of worship and
day school located at the southwest corner of Zachary Lane
and Old Rockford Road.
Coordinator Dillerud gave an overview of the January 16,
1990, staff report.
Chairman Plufka stated to the public that those who wish to
speak should speak to the amendments made by Medicine Lake
Lutheran Church since their deferral, and refrain from
repeating comments made at the last Planning Commission
Meeting.
Coordinator Dillerud showed a color/texture sample of the
proposed fence to the Commissioners.
Commissioner Marofsky asked staff how high the proposed
fence would be.
Coordinator Dillerud responded 8 feet plus the berm height.
Chairman Plufka introduced John Rieschl, representing the
petitioner.
Mr. Rieschl stated that he is the Chairman of Medicine Lake
Lutheran Church. He stated that Medicine Lake Lutheran
Church is currently renting property in St. Louis Park and
that they do not own it.
Mr. Rieschl addressed two concerns brought up at the last
Planning Commission Meeting. The first issue was the
playground location. Mr. Rieschl stated that the reason
they plan to locate the playground at the northwest corner
of the site is mainly.due to safety reasons. He stated that
they wanted it behind the school off of Zachary Lane where
the teachers would more easily have control of the children.
The second issue was the screening on the south end of the
site. Mr. Rieschl stated that they have taken out about 25-
30 trees due to Dutch Elm Disease. He stated that their
plans are to clean out the dead trees and replace them with
more new trees.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mark Baker of 4600 Forestview
Lane.
Mr. Baker stated he was in favor of the proposed plan. He
stated he felt the church would be a positive influence on
the neighborhood.
Chairman Plufka introduced Lannie Beltrand of 4120 Balsam
Lane North.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 13
Ms. Beltrand stated that she was concerned about the
drainage ditch located in her back yard; that the screening
from the parking lot was inadequate; and, that the
landscaping would be insufficient. Ms. Beltrand then asked
if there would be a guarantee that the landscaping will be
completed as proposed.
Commissioner Marofsky explained that the City holds a bond
for all developers to assure completion of landscaping, and
that if they do not do the landscaping as required, the City
will take from that bond money to complete the work for
them.
Ms. Beltrand asked what was going to be done with the
drainage ditch.
City Engineer Faulkner explained that a new culvert will be
put in under Old Rockford Road, and the drainage will be
diverted back to the east to the Zachary Lane ditch.
Ms. Beltrand stated she was also concerned about her
property value decreasing, and asked if the City can
restrict the church from any other uses besides what is
proposed.
Coordinator Dillerud explained that all other uses besides
what is proposed will require a Conditional Use Permit.
Chairman Plufka introduced Veryl Chihak of 4130 Balsam Lane
North.
Mr. Chihak did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Linda Cramer of 11210 42nd Avenue
North.
Ms. Cramer submitted a petition to the Commission opposing
the proposed plan, and Chairman Plufka noted for the record
that a petition was received by the Commission.
Ms. Cramer stated she was in opposition to the proposed
plan, and expressed her concern about an increase in
traffic; the size of the structure is incompatible with the
neighborhood; and, the property value and market value of
her home will decrease.
Chairman Plufka introduced Duane Cramer of 11210 42nd Avenue
North.
Mr. Cramer stated that he was in opposition to the proposed
plan. He stated he had spoken with four prominent realtors,
and they have all given their opinion that his property
value will decrease significantly. He pointed out that the
residents across Balsam Lane will also be visually impacted
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 14
by the proposed structure due to the offset placement of
their homes.
Chairman Plufka asked Mr. Cramer if he had any statistical
proof that his home will depreciate in value.
Mr. Cramer stated that he did not have any written facts.
Chairman Plufka introduced Rod Dallin of 12400 50th Avenue
North.
Mr. Dallin stated he was in favor of the proposed plan, and
he would like to see the.project expedited.
Chairman Plufka introduced Joan Denis of 5105 Norwood.
Ms. Denis stated she was in favor of the proposed plan, and
supports Medicine Lake Lutheran Church. She stated she
would also like to see the project expedited.
Chairman Plufka introduced Eugene Enderlein of 4600 Hemlock
Lane.
Mr. Enderlein did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Bruce Flessner of 4115 Balsam
i Lane.
Mr. Flessner did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Melanie Flessner of 4115 Balsam
Lane.
Ms. Flessner did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Paul Jasper of 11140 40th Avenue
North.
Mr. Jasper expressed his concern about the landscaping and
lighting. He asked what kind of lighting is being proposed.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that per City practice, no
light should leave the site in excess of the .5 -foot candle
contour.
Mr. Rieschl stated that the low profile lights will remain
on until 10 p.m. or 11 p.m. for safety reasons.
Chairman Plufka introduced Jo Ann Kraft of 4345 Oakview
Lane.
Ms. Kraft stated that she was in favor of the proposed plan
and would also like to see it expedited.
Z;-7 b
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 15
Chairman Plufka introduced Len Riley of 11340 47th Avenue
North.
Mr. Riley did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced John Schlenk of 6640 Brunswick
Avenue North.
Mr. Schlenk did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Carol Wehrman of 11625 40th
Avenue North.
Ms. Wehrman did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Gerald Woessner of 4200
Cottonwood Lane North.
Mr. Woessner stated he was in opposition to the proposed
plan. He stated he felt his property value would decrease.
Mr. Woessner stated that the screening on the west side is
inadequate and that there is 115 feet of no screening on the
southwest corner. He stated that the proposed berm would
allow run-off water onto the residents' properties. He
added that the staggered fence would not provide security to
the site or neighboring properties. Mr. Woessner summarized
that the proposed plan and specific structure is not
compatible with the neighborhood.
Chairman Plufka introduced Veryl Chihak of 4130 Balsam Lane
North.
Mr. Chihak stated he was in favor of the proposed plan. He
stated he had talked with six prominent realtors, and five
of them gave their opinion that the proposed plan would not
decrease the value of .his home. He stated that the proposed
school only goes from grade K to grade 8; therefore, no wild
high school students will disrupt the neighborhood. He
further stated that there are other accesses to the
residents' homes, and added that no matter what is built,
their homes will always be at a higher elevation, looking
down.
Chairman Plufka introduced Bruce Flessner of 4115 Balsam
Lane.
Mr. Flessner stated he was in opposition to the proposed
plan. He stated it was too large a project to put on such a
small parcel of land.
Chairman Plufka introduced Melanie Flessner of 4115 Balsam
Lane.
f
A�
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 16
Ms. Flessner stated she agreed with her husband's
statements, and added that they will be visually impacted by
this proposal.
Chairman Plufka introduced Len Riley of 11340 47th Avenue
North.
Mr. Riley did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced John Schlenk of 6640 Brunswick
Avenue North.
Mr. Schlenk did not comment.
Chairman Plufka introduced Carol Wehrman of 11625 40th
Avenue North.
Ms. Wehrman did not comment.
Mr. Ovick, the architect, and Mr. Rieschl presented pictures
to the Commission of their selective cutting.of.trees on the
south end of the property.
Chairman Plufka introduced Beverly Enderlein, the
administrator of the proposed day school.
Ms. Enderlein stated that their endeavor is to be good
neighbors. She stated that the boys and girls and their
families have made many sacrifices to get this project
underway. She stated Medicine Lake Lutheran Church has gone
to great lengths to have adequate landscaping. She further
stated that the proposed plan does not allow for growth,
which Medicine Lake Lutheran Church realizes. Since there
will only be 9 classrooms, Ms. Enderlein stated there will
minimal noise on the playground.
Chairman Plufka introduced Dennis Holmquist of 12648 73rd
Avenue North.
Mr. Holmquist stated he is a member of Medicine Lake
Lutheran Church, and he is in favor of the proposed plan.
Chairman Plufka introduced Stan Nathanson of 11600 41st
Avenue North.
Mr. Nathanson stated he is the president of the Mission
Hills Homeowners Association, and he is in opposition to the
proposed plan. He suggested the association continue to
work with the church until they reach agreement on the plan.
Commissioner Marofsky asked Mr. Rieschl why they have not
changed the roof slope on their Site Plan as suggested at
f, : the last Planning Commission Meeting.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 17
Mr. Rieschl stated that they have looked into other options,
but their Building Committee has determined that the sharply
angled roof would be in character with the neighborhood. He
further stated that turning the building, as suggested at
the last Planning Commission Meeting, would provide greater
visual impact for the residents to the west than it does as
now proposed.
Commissioner Marofsky asked staff if there was any kind of
provision for maintenance of the fence, trees, and berm.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that there is no provision
beyond perservation of the the actual screening to comply
with the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Marofsky stated his concern that the fence,
trees, and berm could become an eyesore if not maintained.
Coordinator Dillerud responded that it would be possible to
require continued maintenance of these items as a condition
of the Conditional Use Permit, but that it would be very
difficult to administer.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Chairman Plufka,
to recommend approval of the request by Medicine Lake
Lutheran Church for a Rezoning, Site Plan, Conditional Use
Permits, and Variance to construct a place of worship and
day school located at the southwest corner of Zachary Lane
and Old Rockford Road, subject to the conditions set forth
in the staff report of January 16, 1990.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Chairman Plufka to
amend the main motion by adding a condition that the
petitioner must conform with the Zoning Ordinance as to
screening at the south side of the proposed site.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. Commissioner Wire abstained.
MOTION carried.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner
Marofsky, to amend the main motion by adding a condition
that limits the day school enrollment to 175 students,
grades K - 8.
Chairman Plufka stated that he was concerned that the
Planning Commission would be stepping into State Law if they
approved such an amendment. He stated that he does not see
the necessity of such a limitation.
Commissioner Tierney asked the petitioner what would be the
maximum number of students proposed.
Ms. Enderlein responded that Medicine Lake Lutheran Church
has a resolution stating that they shall not exceed 225
= -7 6
MOTION TO APPROVE
MOTION TO AMEND
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
MOTION TO AMEND
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 18
students for enrollment. She further stated that they
presently have 198 students enrolled.
Roll Call Vote. 1 Aye. Commissioners Pierce, Tierney,
Marofsky, Stulberg, and Chairman Plufka Nay. Commissioner
Wire abstained. MOTION failed.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Chairman Plufka,
to amend the main motion by adding a condition that limits
the day school enrollment to 225 students, grades K - 8.
Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. Commissioner Stulberg and Chairman
Plufka Nay. Commissioner Wire abstained. MOTION carried.
Commissioner Stulberg stated he will vote in opposition to
the proposed plan because he felt the petitioner has not
fulfilled the requirements of Standard No. 3 of the
Conditional Use Permit standards because of the massive roof
height and the poor landscape plan.
Commissioner Zylla expressed his concern with the roof
structure. He stated it serves no purpose except for form,
and that the roof line should be broken and lowered.
Commissioner Marofsky stated he was in agreement with
Commissioner Zylla, and will therefore vote in opposition to
the proposed plan.
Roll Call Vote on main motion. 3 Ayes. Commissioners
Pierce, Marofsky, and Stulberg Nay. Commissioner Wire
abstained. MOTION failed.
Chairman Plufka stated that he felt the proposal does not
violate the Zoning Ordinance, and he does not disagree with
its use.
Commissioner Marofsky
the use, but he felt
building structure.
Commissioner Pierce
Commissioner Marofsky,
roof mass.
stated that his vote was not against
the site,was inappropriate for the
stated he was in agreement with
and stated he felt there was too much
Chairman Plufka called a 5 minute recess at 9:55 p.m.
Chairman Plufka resumed the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
Chairman Plufka introduced the request by John DeVries for a
Lot Division/Lot Consolidation and Variance for Wild Wings
Addition located at 4925 Valley Forge Lane.
1� y Chairman Plufka waived the overview of the January 18, 1990,
staff memorandum.
\ - � -7 b
VOTE - MOTION FAILED
MOTION TO AMEND
VOTE —MOTION CARRIED
VOTE - MAIN MOTION
FAILED
JOHN DEVRIES/WILD WINGS
ADDITION (89101)
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24, 1990
Page 19
Coordinator Dillerud stated that the City Council has
already approved the street vacation of 49th Avenue North.
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner
Wire, to recommend approval of the request by John DeVries
for a Lot Division/Lot Consolidation and Variance for Wild
Wings Addition located at 4925 Valley Forge Lane, subject to
the conditions set forth in the staff report of December 5,
1989.
Vote. All Ayes. MOTION carried.
Commissioner Tierney discussed with the Planning Commission
the staff memorandum that was presented with the agenda
which describes the sign issue related to Miles Homes on
Nathan Lane. She noted that Miles Homes had requested a
second nameplate sign due to the substantial distance
between their "main frontage" on Highway 169 and their
actual entrance on Nathan Lane. It was the consensus of the
Planning Commission that no basis existed to consider
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to accommodate a second
nameplate sign for sites with multiple street frontages.
Chairman Plufka appointed Commissioners Tierney, Stulberg,
Plufka, and Wire to the Task Force Study Committee on the
Official Controls Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Wire was appointed Chairman of the Committee.
Community Development Director Tremere advised the
Commission that the City Council had formed a Task Force to
study the issue of outdoor storage at retail locations,
including gasoline service stations. Commissioner Marofsky
had been appointed by the Mayor as Chairman of that
Committee, Commissioner Pierce was appointed, and
Commissioner Zylla, as requested, was the alternate.
Commissioner Zylla indicated that due to business
commitments, he would be unable to participate in meetings
of the Official Controls Committee, but that he would desire
that his concerns with regard to removing any penalty for a
developer to down guide his own property, and to what he
considers to be excessive Fire Code requirements by the City
of Plymouth be considered.
Chairman Plufka adjourned the meeting at 11 p.m.
=-7 6
MOTION TO APPROVE
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
OTHER BUSINESS
PLYMOUTH TRANSIT
DIAL -A -RIDE
DATA SUMMARY - MONTH OF JANUARY, 1990
Cash Received
-------
Non -Cash
Fares --------
-------
Rides --------
Card
Cards
Bill
Free
No
Senior/
Date Rte
Fares
Sales
Recvd
Transt.
Later
Rides
Canc
Show
Regulr
Student
Chldrn
TOTAL
Miles
* Hours
01102/90 70
40.50
4.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
7
4
36
0
0
36
212
12.25
01/02190 71
26.50
3.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
13
0
27
0
027
241
12.25
01/02/9(' 7c"
12.03
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
6
14
0
0
14
210
8.50
Smbtot_ls
80.00
8.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
21
12
77
0
0
77
663
33.00
01/03/90 70
28.50
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
12
24
0
0
24
2237
12.50
01/03/90 71
21.50
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6
3
33
0
0
33
268
12.50
01/03/90 72
i3.04
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
13
0
0
13
119
5.00
01103/90 72
10.50
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
0
10
0
2
12
309
4.00
-------- ---
Subtotal=
---------------
83.5+3
10.00
------------------------------
9.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
10
15
-----------------------------
80
0
2
82
---------------
733
34.00
01!04190 70
41.5E
4.00
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
1
43
0
0
43
244
122.50
01104/90 71
31.5!
0.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9
0
40
0
4
40
254
12.50
01/04/90 72
26.06
10.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
5
29
0
0
29
239
---------------
9.50
-------- --
Subtote-ls
--------
--------------
99.00
---------------
10.00
-------------------------------
19.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
16
---------
6
-----------------------------
112
-----------------------------
0
0
112
737
----------------
34.50
01/05,190 70
46.00
O.GO
5.00
0.00
0.00
17.00
7
1
45
0
0
45
273
2.50
01/05190 71
334.00
0.00
6.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
10
G
40
0
0
40
ff22
12.00
0V05190 72
:1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
2
11
0
0
11
203
--------------
9.00
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
91.00
---------------
0.00
------------------------------
11.00
----------^--------------------
0.00
3.00
0.00
---------
18
---------
3
-----------------------------
96
-----------------------------
0
0
76
588
---------------
33.50
0i/06/90 70
38.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
1
32
-----------------------------
0
0
32
182
---------------
10.25
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
38.50
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
0.00
-----------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
0
---------
1
32
-----------------------------
0
0
32
192
---------------
10.25
01107/90 70
42.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
0
32
0
0
32
205
7.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
42.50
---------------
0.00
------------------------------
0.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
5
---------
0
-----------------------------
32
-----------------------------
0
0
32
---------------
205
---------------
7.50
01!08/90 10
28.50
0.00
222.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
6
7
26
0
0
26
250
12.00
01/06-190 71
20.43
10.00
7.00
0.00
4.00
0.00
7
3
29
0
0
"r7
228
12.00
- WOS190 7E
13.0?
0.00
6.00
0.00
0.00
9.00
6
3
18
0
0
18
197
8.50
-------- ---
Sut:atals
---------------
61.50
!0.00
-------------------------------
15.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
19
12
-----------------------------
73
n
0
?3
---------------
675
32.50
o r,
�;.�}'
0.R0
q
tt.�0
r.
6
-.,.
�,
n
r.
V
3y
28?
1 ._a
PLYMOUTH TRANSIT
DIAL -A -RIDE
DATA SUMMARY - MONTH OF JANUARY. 1990
Cash Received
------ Nan -Cash
Fares --------
-------
Rides --------
Card
Cards
Bili
Free
No
Senior/
Date Rte
Fares
Sales
Recvd
Transf.
Later
Rides
Canc
Show
Regulr
Student
Chldrn
TOTAL
Miles
• Hours
01/09/90 71
---
34.50
0.00
---
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9
1
34
0
0
34
283
12.25
01/09/90 72
lcc".00
0.00
5.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
2
5
-
18
-----------------------
0
0
lE
223
--- - ------
9.00
- --
-------- ---
Subtotals
Subtotals
-------
---------------
76.00
---------------
0.00
-----------
--- -
11.00
-------------------------------
- ------------------
0.00
1.00
0.00
-------
15
---------
12
86
-----------------------------
0
0
86
788
---------------
33.50
01110/90 70
38.50
0.00
2.00
6.00
1.00
0.00
0
0
42
0
0
42
273
12.50
01/10/90 71
31.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6
B
33
0
0
33
259
12.50
01/10/90 72
8.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
2
11
0
0
11
121
5.50
01/10/90 72
8.00
0.00
12.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0
--------
0
5
---------------------------
3
1
9
105
---------------
4.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------------
H5.50
0.00
------------------------------
20.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
10
10
91
3
1
95
758
35.00
01/11/90 70
3B.50
20.00
3.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
3
6
3B
0
0
38
2B8
12.50
01/11/90 71
26.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
7
2
33
0
0
33
253
12.50
01/11/90 72
11.50
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
1
13
0
0
13
133
4.50
01/11/90 72
5.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
6
-----------------------------
0
0
6
91
---------------
4.25
------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
81.50
---------------
20.00
-------------------------------
6.00
-------------------------------
0.00
2.00
0.00
---------
It
---------
9
90
---------------------------
0
0
90
765
---------------.
33.75
01112/90 70
45.00
0.00
3.00
0.0.5
0.00
0.00
5
7
42
0
0
42
255
12.25
01/12/90 71
29.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
5
4
29
0
0
29
260
12.25
01/12/90 72
20.00
11.00
33.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
1
20
0
0
20
241
9.50
------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
94.00
---------------
10.00
------------
6.00
------------------------------
0.00
2.00
0.00
12
--------
12
91
---------------------------
0
0
91
756
---------------
34.00
01/13/90 70
54.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
4
42
-----------------------------
0
0
42
246
-------------
9.00
------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
54.00
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
2.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
2
---------
4
42
-----------------------------
0
0
42
246
---------------
9.00
01114/90 70
12.50
0.00
0.00
0.0{,
0.00
0.00
3
0
11
-----------------------------
0
0
11
164
---------------
8.00
------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
13.50
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
0.00
------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
3
---------
0
11
-----------------------------
0
0
11
164
---------------
8.00
01/15/90 70
30.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
5
4
32
0
0
32
245
12.25
01115/90 71
20.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
20
2
20
0
0
20
210
12.50
01115190 72
11.50
0.00
4.00
0.O`t
0.00
0.00
8
2
. 14
0
0
14
178
B.00
-------- ---
Subbtals
--------
---------------
61.50
---------------
O.OG
-
5.00
-------------------------------
8.00
0.00
0.00
33
---------
8
66
-----------------------------
0
0
6�
633
---------------
32.75
01 4j 90l 7,,
44.t'!i'
:3.00
0.ir<
.00
[.00
0.00
PLYMOUTH TRANSIT
DIAL -A -RIDE
DATA SUMMARY - MONTH OF 3AMUARY� 1990
Cash Received
-------
Non -Cash
Fares --------
-------
Rides --------
Card
Cards
Bill
Free
No
Senior/
Date Rte
Fares
Sales
Recvd
Transf.
Later
Rides
Canc
Show
Regulr
Student
Chldrn
TOTAL
Miles -
---------------
Hours
-------- ---
01/16/90 71
-------------
26.50
0.00
-------------------------------
1.00
0.00
7.00
0.00
--------
9
5
----------------------------
41
0
0
41
244
11.25
01/16190 72
28.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
3
28
-----------
0
0
----------
28
231
---------------
8.75
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
98.50
---------------
0.00
------------------------------
1.00
------------------------------
1.00
7.00
0.00
---------
13
---------
11
----
110
-----------------------------
0
0
110
722
---------------
32.25
01/17/90 70
40.50
0.00
4.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
6
6
39
0
0
39
279
12.50
01/17190 71
32.50
0.00
4.00
9.00
0.00
0.00
17
4
42
0
0
42
305
12.50
01117/90 7'c
25.5G
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
1
24
----------------------------
0
0
24
253
-------------
9.00
-
-------- ---
Subtotals
-------
---------------
9B.50
---------------
0.00
------------------------------
8.00
-------------------------------
10.00
0.00
0.00
---------
27
---------
11
105
--------------------------
0
0
10-5
--
B37
---------------
34.00
01/18/94 70
42,00
0.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
6
6
43
0
0
43
272
12.25
01118190 71
37.50
0.00
10.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
9
4
41
0
0
41
285
12.50
01118/90 72
16.06
0.00
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
2
21
0
0
21
221
--------
9.00 ..
:
-------- ---
--------
---------------
95.50
---------------
0.00
------------------------------
21.00
-------------------------------
2.00
1.00
0.00
---------
19
-- ------
12
-----------------------------
145
-----------------------------
0
0
105
7B2
--------------
33.75
01/19190 70
33.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
11
34
0
0
34
240
12.00
01/19/90 71
31.50
20.00
3.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
8
2
32
0
0
32
243
12.25
01;19/90 72
11r.50
0.00
5.00
0.00
0.01
0. 01)
3
2
22
0
0
22
267
9.50
---
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
84.00
---------------
20.00
-------------------------------
11.00
------------------------------
0.00
1.00
0.00
---------
15
---------
15
----------------------------
Be
-----------------------------
0
0
Be
-----------
690
---------------
33.75
01120/90 70
47.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
2
38
-----------------------------
0
0
38
252
---------------
9.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
---------------
47.50
0.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
4
2
38
0
0
38
252
9.50
011221/90 70
14.00
0.00
0.00•
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
Y
17
0
0
17
159
B.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
--------------
14.00
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
0.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
1
---------
4
-----------------------------
17
-----------------------------
0
0
17
---------------
159
---------------
8.50
01/22/90 70
35.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
2
1
31
0
31
255
12.50
01122/90 71
27.00
0.00
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8
3
28
U
0
28
237
12.25
01122/90 72
21.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
1
24
----------------------------
0
0
E4
215
---------------
8.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
83.00
---------------
o')o
------------------------------
16.00
-------------------------------
i.00
0.00
0.00
---------
14
---------
5
83
-----------------------------
U
0
8"s
707
--------------
33.25
ilii=3190" Ito
S1.50
0.00
3.00
0.0.7
0.00
0.00
2
3
33
0
0
33
245
12.00
0: %E3 0 71
227. (1i.
0.0
3.00
Ot$
r;, 00
0.00
53
29
r:
a
cy
220
!2.50
Of 01
0.10
0.00
2
..
�,''.
....
I'6
915(1
PLYMOUTH TRANSIT
DIAL -A -RIDE
DATA. SUMMARY - MONTH OF JANUARY, 1990
Cash Received
------
Non -Cash
Fares --------
-------
Rides --------
Card
Cards
Bill
Free
RD
Senior/
Date Rte
-------- ---
Fares
---------------
Sales
Recvd
------------------------------
Transf.
Later
Rides
Canc
---------
Show
Regulr
---------------------------
Student
Chldrn
TOTAL
Miles
---------------
•Hours
------- ---
Subtotals
--------------
78.00
0.00
-----------------------
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9
8
85
0
0
85
661
34.00
01/24/90 70
36.50
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
5
35
0
0
35
240
12.00
01/24140 71
28.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7
4
30
0
0
30
198
12.50
01/24190 72
9.50
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
1
11
0
0
11
100
4.50
01124/90 72
12.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
1
15
-----------------------------
0
0
15
110
---------------
5.00
-------- --
Subtotals
--------
---------------
86.50
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
8.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
14
--------
it
91
-----------------------------
0
0
91
648
---------------
34.00
01/25/90 70
49.50
10.00
5.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
3
9
50
0
0
50
263
12.25
01125/90 71
27.00
0.00
12,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10
1
32
0
0
32
215
12.25
01/25/90 72
16.00
0.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
2
18
--------
0
--------------------
1
18
188
---------------
8.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
42.50
---------------
10,00
-------------------------------
21:00
-------------------------------
0.00
1.00
0.00
--------
16
---------
12
100
-----------------------------
0
0
100
666
--------------
33.00
01/26/90 70
45.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
13
40
0
0
40
253
12.00
01126/90 71
30.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
13
22
29
0
0
29
212
12.25.
01.126/90 72
17.50
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6
2
18
----------------------------
0
0
18
217
---------------
8.50'
------- ---
Subtotals
-------
---------------
92,50
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
6.00
-------------------------------
0.00
1,00
0.00
---------
23
---------
117
87
-----------------------------
0
0
87
602
---------------
32.75
01127/90 70
43.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
2
41
0
0
41
209
-- ------------
9.50
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
43.00
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
2.00
-------------------------------
0.00
0,00
0.00
---------
3
---------
2
-----------------------------
41
-----------------------------
0
0
41
209
---------------
9.50
01/26/90 70
12.50
0.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6
0
12
0
0
12
166
8.00
-------- ---
Subtotals
--------
---------------
12,50
---------------
0.00
-------------------------------
2.00
-----------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
---------
6
---------
0
-----------------------------
12
-----------------------------
0
0
12
---------------
166
---------------
8.00
?1/29/90 70
30.00
0.00
2.00
2.00
0,00
0.00
4
4
26
0
0
26
222
12.00
01/29/90 71
25.00
(f. 00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
15
3
26
0
0
26
2256
12.25
01/24/90 72
16.50
10.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
2
19
0
0
19
183
8.00
--- 2,ubtatals
--------
71.50 ---10.00
---------------
10.01
-------------------------------
2.00
0.00
0.00
2224
---------
9
71
-----------------------------
0
0
71
661
---------------
--------------5113Ox90
32.25
0 3 Oil: 9 070
36.00
).00
0.0'v'
0.00
0.10
0.00
6
6
35
0
3:
2250
12.50
140 71
24.5;
0.01
6.00
0.00
0100
0.00
9
E
24
C.
0
24
209
12.25
x.113%/9i 72
??.50
:,;,_I
C�.O'1
,.f..:
0.00
0100
3
6
2F
;�
)i
7_
22,1
9.00
g
PLYMOUTH TRANSIT
Total days in sonth = 30
Total Passengers cn 22 weekdays 1972, or 90 per day
Tetal Passengers on E weekend days 225,,or 28 per day
2197
Total Passengers per Hour 2.7
Total Miles per Passenger 7.6
PLYMOUTH
TRANSIT
DIAL -A -RIDE
DATA SUMMARY - MONTH OF JANUARY, 1990
Cash Received
-------
Non -Cash
Fares -------
-------
Rides --------
Card
Cards
Bill
Free
No
Senior/
Date Rte
------ ---
tares
--------------
Sales
Recvd
-----------------------------
Transf.
Later
Rides
Canc
---------
Show
Regulr
-----------------------------
Student
Chldrn
TOTAL
Miles
---------------
- Hours
Subtctals
--------
83.00
--------------
0.00
6.00
------------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
18
---------
18
81
-----------------------------
0
0
81
679
---------------
33.75
01/31/90 70
44.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
7
42
0
0
42
2B6
12.00
01131190 71
31.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11
7
30
0
0
30
294
!2.25
01/31/90 72
10.00
0.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0
1
14
0
0
14
129
4.50
01/31190 72
10,50
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
4
12
0
0
12
lice
4.50
Subtotals
--------
96.00
---------------
0.00
8.00
-----------------------------
0.00
0.00
0.00
16
---------
19
98
-----------------------------
0
0
98
821
--------------
33.25
TOTALS
2138.50
IOB.00
238.00
21.00
21.00
0.00
397
261
2191
S
3
2197
17235
BOb.75
PLYMOUTH TRANSIT
Total days in sonth = 30
Total Passengers cn 22 weekdays 1972, or 90 per day
Tetal Passengers on E weekend days 225,,or 28 per day
2197
Total Passengers per Hour 2.7
Total Miles per Passenger 7.6
--------------------
PLYMOUTH ➢IAL -P. -RIDE
--------------------
19970 MONTHLY COST SUMMARY
01 -Feb -90
Subsidyl Recovery Total Rides/
Total Cost Revenue Deficit Passenoers Passenver Ratio Hours Hour
------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------
3anuary 16,538.3E 2.2:6.03 414,292.3B) 2197 66.51 13.6, 806.75 2.7
------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Accueulatee
TDtals 16.539.36 2,246.00 114,292.38) 2,197 66.51 13.61 806,75 2.72
F 19-J84-90 �.r b
--------------------
PLYMOUTH DIA: -A -RIDE
19B9 MONTHLY COST SUMMARY
Subsidy/ Recovery
Total Cast Revenue Deficit Passengers Passenger Ratio
December
i5.69E.63
2.609.75
(1v,2E2.8e)
2275
$5.84
16.4%
Novesber
15,662.00
2,469.00
113,193.00)
2346
$5.62
15.6%
October-
161123.25
2,203.00
(1:,920.25)
2095
$6.64
13.7%
September
11,603.00
1,687.300
(9,915.70)
1541
$6.43
14.5%
August
121756.13
1,689.75
110,966.3e)
1638
$6.63
14.8%
Je.ly
11,669.63
1,657.00
(10,012.63)
139q-
$7.16
14.2%
June
12,243.63
1,703.45
(10,540.18)
1532
$6.86
13.9%
May
12,279.50
1,354.0)
(10,925.50)
245
$B.78
11.0%
Agri:
4,592.00
465.50
14,126.50)
402
----------------------------
$10.26
10.1%
Accumulated
-------------------------------
Totals
112,E21.77
16.038,75
156.753.02)
143473
$6.69
14.2%
CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR
Kim M. Bergman 0. 557-7030
13930 60th Avenue No. V.M. 550-5065
Plymouth 55446
COUNCILMEMBERS
Lloyd 3. Ricker R. 473-6416
17015 - 14th Avenue No. V.M. 550-5067
Plymouth 55447
Robert Zitur R. 559-3728
12185 - 48th Circle V.M. 550-5069
Plymouth, MN 55442
Maria Vasiliou R. 473-2316
1775 Black Oaks Lane V.M. 550-5068
Plymouth 55447
Carole J. Helliwell R. 557-1530
P.O. Box 42183 V.M. 550-5066
Plymouth, MN 55442
CITY ATTORNEY
James 3. Thomson, Jr.
HOLMES & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402
A
2/14/90 - R
Term Expires
12131191
(Council - 1/2/90)
12/31/91
(Council - 1/4/88)
12/31/91
(Council - 2/3/86)
12/31/93
(Council - 1/7/85)
12/31/93
(Council - 1/2/90)
0. 337-9209 (Direct Dial)
337-9300 (Holmes & Graven)
1-77- x 0
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the -town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
A
„ ANION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
r � /��E.�SE f��T /WJE �� • i�� � �G _ /� --
V
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: A10-,f15P7,';U1
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: AMI -0 �• SS�%ya2
PHONE NUMBER: xS- :5
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/ TY ADDRESS INVOLVED: �w•-e. C.CJD�C�`•�%� S
A
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
EAM
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:.
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 1��100 �,•� �� �� VV
PHONE NUMBER: — O
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you -would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide'.your_•name; address and phone number$ we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
DOF5 (,(-(Cf 11CPUSE 1'(1 -
scK,q (S -r w �e��£�Jpe-cw p
61 C Mcr(op Ak)f,«t 01
cv�EJH - TT (5 XPqFP_a.A_5 7-0 PCJ%JF-
(KW-4q TVA- ftS (9 rl ?7J (7S 7 Par`- PN£v['2 w
(O -rKti.- Ci � ND (o( 0�,-FfPSI a-)
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
(%NLVL,g, F_ -(Wf- Bim- SOC72-6P , PGT-AiSrC
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: o -&O b 6crrg
PHONE NUMBER: 5 57-oTgy
IC-)
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the' City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your -name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED: jQiw �-icllt.•..c�
Ord
�-�--
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
/v
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: 6" .1, 6okk A n/�Y✓D����
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: J,044' --r✓f S t hw er Awwa no W
PHONE NUMBER: 6 6 3
t 12 1 : M
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide' -your name, -address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
.
NMM�E OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT•
PHONE NUMBER: _�
-\0
RESIDENT FEEDBAOC FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED: 5906
�.vo�ccr�,r �c- iu�s�i roau o� IVA�►7�e Li'�.u�
km R .
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE: (A�IY:�t Ode& Soo F.IiiW O� S_
. l • • - -
'T� � r(?-1�4�I�G l.�f�WC P�. �f�ST�1tJ« � 1•�.�T 1'�tQ�ILS
We wiw 886 to PARS'(IIS OUMPAW. t M- 1 E
L0 ITU
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: J AW5 , `e*tAwo _ (SUSUoM wW Wq)
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: Z`�5 � 5�' EY.I�D Woo TD SgDT Noma
pp Gates
PHONE NUMBER:
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have -a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: 4(/
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: �m 4 �yI • `yf/% itC,
PHONE NUMBER: -S-y'I— 770
i
11
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPER Y ADDRESS INVOLVED:'
�G�t•,�tYT �.�t�f-� I�.d�. �'l93a ���Itvicw `n• Iil.
A
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE: �LL �•o fl '�� "' ro'c�
C'a9 kAit & -dkf!rF covit -*GAf4'i-#LI LSt (fact- 1doo -'bpi-
A
/
5che,,;df 4.4, ffJ,
4V IV
M44L c Irw4k Lx') A
an �vt+�rTit � S.On [•C r �1 �� tri ��
041(/0 RACCVxye 'flxi -CVeq- ,A ( e--r*Afi*0n 6f t�! rc ? , In �f grew.
NAMEOF CONCERNED RESIDENT: OD&Vt0 ,T• 6 1UCAI
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: q q So P'Atv'tw I.A. N
PHONE NUMBER:3 �Z 35Q� Cu • S�3 -2aP6
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
UV W��
A
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
i K
4J -(�2
'kkqW4' OG C'(
r1,01, &E i3 -# Ae t yjo c.r
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: 'y►ti.Pk_Ckj(A5
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER:
1=—\ c7
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this -form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
MAM
IOWA t
A
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER: rj,, -r t c 1
K1
x,366
RESIDENT FEEDBAgC FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
�Lv td N n)
r -i-
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: —I` q!j Leh) (04 W041�
PHONE NUMBER: 559 �-���� (-be4 Ce—
I a---- - Lj
� k'j
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER:
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form.1f you have a question or concern which does not appear.
on the town meeting agenda -to which you would -like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your=name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: S //U . �T/V ILL
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 2M
Z M
PHONE NUMBER: cf _ 6-7 Z
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM•
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which•does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would- like the City, to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION/ DESIRE THE CITY TO
&2,6E A42" I !i/ AA114? i / ./i i
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:/
PHONEzez
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your -name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
-rD 4
ACTIOQN YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: 'L ,
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: b 5
PHONE NUMBER: SE 3- a o d
-=-- \ o 'D
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your.name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED: .
ArTTAU VAu nrcTar TUC rTTV TA TAVF*
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER:
.s
February 16, 1990 CITY OF
PLYMOUTH
Pru Palecek
11917 23rd Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Ms. Palecek:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your letter to me for review and comment
from the January 29 town meeting. Your letter addresses your concern at
the railroad crossing on West Medicine Lake Drive approximately one
quarter mile north of Highway 55.
This railroad crossing is reviewed annually for the need for stop signs
or some other form of signalized warning. There are only two trains per
week crossing West Medicine Lake Drive at this location. The train
movements are very slow and at a maximum of ten miles per hour. This
railroad crossing does have warning signs in advance of the railroad
crossing and immediately at the crossing warning the motorists of the
railroad track.
Because of the infrequent train movements and also the slow movement of
the train, it does not warrant placing stop signs or other type of
signalized protection at this crossing. There are approximately six
thousand vehicles per day using West Medicine Lake Drive, and as you
suggested in your letter, would require all of these vehicles to stop at
the train tracks, this is more of a hazard than the two train movements
per week.
The City will continue to monitor the train movements and traffic
volumes on West Medicine Lake Drive on an annual basis and if conditions
change, some additional form of protection may be warranted. As with
all railroad crossings, motorists should always look both directions
before proceeding across the tracks.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
I A
9 o
I am concerned about the railroad crossing on West Medicine
Lake Drive just north of highway 55. It is marked only with
the railroad crossing sign, with no stop sign and no signal
light.
When I first moved here this summer, my husband told me to
please be sure to slow down or stop and look when crossing
there. I hadn't even noticed there was a railroad crossing,
although I had driven over it many times!
Now I do slow way down and look, and I think my husband and I
are the only motorists who do so. We get honked at, etc.
And I never see anyone else stop to look. Yet it is so
dangerous. Trains do come through several times a day, and
although they blow a horn, I'm sure many residents drive with
radios blasting and like me, perhaps have never even noticed
the existence of this crossing.
People nowadays feel that trains are obsolete and tracks are
unused and can be safely ignored.
I would like to see a stop sign at this crossing at minimum.
In a city of over 50,0005 there should not be any
uncontrolled railroad crossings. This is a tragedy waiting
to happen.
Sincerely,
Pru Palecek
11917 23rd Ave N.
Plymouth 55441
557-7196
February 16, 1990
Bill Thompson
9640 26th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mr. Thompson:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. Your form addressed the improvements which are proposed on
26th Avenue in 1991.
The traffic counts completed on the roadways in 1980 indicate
approximately the following number of vehicles per day:
26th Avenue at Highway 169 10,300
26th Avenue at East Medicine Lake Blvd. 1,000
East Medicine Lake Blvd. north of 26th Avenue 1,800
East Medicine Lake Blvd. south of 36th Avenue 5,500
Although these traffic counts do indicate that there are some vehicles'.
using this route to avoid Highway 169, the traffic counts are not overly
above those that are expected for this "collector" street. 26th
Avenue/Medicine Ridge Road/East Medicine Lake Blvd./Zachary Lane do
serve the "collector" street for this area to distribute the traffic
from all the residential homes to the other major roadways within the
area such as Highway 169 and County Road 9. The improvement proposed
for 26th Avenue is not needed to encourage more traffic to bypass
Highway 169, but is necessary to improve the deteriorating condition of
the existing roadway.
All properties in Plymouth are expected to pay for a residential street.
Your property has never been assessed or paid for a residential street
since the existing 26th Avenue was improved by the County as a County
Road. When 26th Avenue is improved, your property would be proposed to
be assessed for a typical residential street within Plymouth. The
additional costs associated with making 26th Avenue a "collector" street
to also carry the traffic from the entire neighborhood would be paid for
by the City and not directly assessed to the property owners.
Before the improvement of 26th Avenue would be finally approved by the
City Council, you will be notified of a public hearing. Based on our
tentative schedule, this will be in 1991. Through the town meeting each
year or by contacting the City Engineering Department, you can keep
abreast of the proposed scheduled for the improvement of 26th Avenue.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
Bill Thompson
February 16, 1990
Page Two
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Sincerely,
'A
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE
OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
►Cc C'
aJa --1 op2sztD
vL
No
7ke 4 ro. -XI- no c.j
%c)} h rnaR^1i no, 4, E\Jc
W
--j-
{ (� M 0.i by
ouv
pV WKs
we.x4 �-, _ X also 60o vi 4 4 �lnk c..,.lJ a �Zyep
Ihe�taSc i•a
'ttie "�'�x' �ssP3.✓�e�1 �/
'�esc ���o✓Q►+�c�.-� //1 f'$
- -/S cr
f�P=G'Pe.��`��
Q�ee. the �P��
►��.1 l�la�{ti 1�.�. /V��IO�e �ciave
f A`F �� `N�es�
►,��ro.�e vv.t�.4 s S w��i
he...e .
ACTION
YOU DESIRE
THE CITY TO TAKE:
L'1't
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: ` LL i�Oyr�Q
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 9(Q (1l0 e)
PHONE NUMBER: si%- �87�
4-c/(09 .
\ease Co
w.2
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: ` LL i�Oyr�Q
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 9(Q (1l0 e)
PHONE NUMBER: si%- �87�
February 16, 1990
Mrs. Ruth Lueck
9710 26th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mrs. Lueck:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. You addressed the proposed improvement of 26th Avenue and
also the need for a place to take leaves.
Plymouth and other cities in Hennepin County are continuing to work
together in order that we do have a disposal site for leaves and grass
clippings for this year. If you have not heard of the disposal sites by
this spring, I would suggest that you call the City Engineering
Department for more detailed information on leaves/grass clipping
disposal.
The purpose of improving 26th Avenue is not to encourage more people to
bypass Highway 169. The improvement is necessary to provide for proper.
access for all of the residential area between 36th Avenue, Medicine
Lake Boulevard and Highway 169. As I believe you are aware, East
Medicine Lake Boulevard is in very poor condition and does require
improvement.
As was stated at the Town Meeting, the improvement of East Medicine Lake
Boulevard and 26th Avenue is proposed for 1991. Before the improvement
would be finalized, you would receive a notice of a public hearing since
your property is adjacent to 26th Avenue. The City, during the planning
of this project, will continue to work with the property owners in order
to have a project which will discourage the majority of traffic through
the area, but which will also satisfy the traffic needs for the entire
residential area.
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
K- :]6l J`�
6 ��s
WS
40
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE: E a
VY1 a .i h -P_ .t� -e_ L° t9 L, u Y- m
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: T] ('� _� I -k U e ll.J
PHONE NUMBER: 6
February 16, 1990
Arlene Johnson
3535 Rosewood Lane
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Ms. Johnson:
Z kt
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. You addressed the retaining wall along Northwest Boulevard
at approximately West Medicine Lake Drive. As you state, we have had
difficulty in obtaining the proper growth of landscaping material on
this wall.
The City presently has a contract with a landscaper who planted the
necessary plant materials in the spring of 1989. This contract requires
the landscaper to plant the material and assure and maintain their
growth for two years. Because of our drought conditions last year, this
landscaper will have to do some replanting again this spring.
You suggest that the City spray the wall with some material in order to'
prevent all growth. The City wants to obtain a growth on this wall in
order to discourage vandals from using this wall as a "blackboard" for
graffiti. This has been a problem on the concrete wall along Highway
101 in the southern part of the City.
Hopefully, weather conditions will be better this spring and summer that
when the plantings are reestablished, they will maintain themselves for
future growth.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
-- �� w���� �� � Vl/� ,e{-t�.t � C'. K �o (��n�'hwta'i � �.�: d��G°,�tiuY�.-y►
�V --- ss Gr -9
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER: SS -I - 1(0,3 (o
l"rC
I I , OF
February 16, 1990 PLYMOUTR
Margaret Jaeger
12325 47th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 12 - AREA FOUR TOWN MEETING
Dear Ms. Jaeger:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your comments to me, which you submitted,
since you were unable to attend the February 12 town meeting. I agree
that the solid waste issue in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan area
is a larger issue than any of us realize. The state of Minnesota has
adopted laws to decrease our dependence on solid waste landfills which
have been our method of disposal for many years.
As part of the overall changes, Plymouth has initiated a curbside
Recycling program. This has been one of the most successful Recycling
programs in the Metropolitan area. Although we do not provide for the
curbside recycling of plastics, you can drop off your plastic containers
at our dropoff center at 14900 23rd Avenue. This dropoff center is:
conveniently located in the center of Plymouth just south of Highway 55
between Niagara Lane and Fernbrook Lane.
The disposal of our solid waste into landfills was a cheap method of
disposal, but it has major drawbacks because of pollution to the
environment. With the construction of the burn facilities to process the
solid waste before their disposal, it is increasing our cost for trash
collection. If we are going to protect our environment, we all have to
realize that it is going to be more costly.
Presently, the City of Plymouth has a Solid Waste Collection System that
is completely provided for by independent contractors. There are several
licensed contractors within the City and each home contacts one of these
collectors for their trash collection. This does mean that there can be
several trash collectors within an area on different days of the week.
Presently, the City Council, through public hearings, has heard from
residents that they wish to have this system continued in order that they
do have an option on who collects their trash. This will continue to be
reviewed as our collection costs increase in order to provide a less
costly system if requested by a majority of the properties within
Plymouth.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
Margaret Jaeger
February 16, 1990
Page Two
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
Dick Pouliot or myself about the City's Recycling program or our overall
Solid Waste System.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.-
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
I
I.
=-t
TOWN MEETING AGENDA
AREA 4.
r ♦ ' Vr.•�l � L
February 12, 1990.
7:00 p.m. /-
1990 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
A. Streets /
B. Sanitary Sewer `d '
C. Water
D. Public Buildings
E. Parks/Trails /ori
II. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
A. Development Activity
B. Comprehensive Plan Update
III. PUBLIC SAFETY,
Gz� U
A. Police/Fire Report
B. Police/Fire Alarm Permits
C. Neighborhood Watch Program
D. Animal Control
IV. OTHER ITEMS
A. Public Transportation - Plymouth Metrolink/Dial-a-R de
B.' Local Government Cable Access Channel 37
C. Solid Waste Recycling Program
4
CITY OF
February 16, 1990 pIYMOUTR
Kathy Zeinemann
9800 26th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Ms. Zeinemann:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. Your questions are about the proposed improvement on 26th
Avenue west of Highway 169.
The street improvements proposed for 1990 include only the streets south
of 26th Avenue and do not include any improvement on 26th Avenue. As was
stated at the town meeting, the improvement of 26th Avenue is tentatively
scheduled for 1991. At the present time, the City Council has not adopted
the proposed 1991 Improvement Program.
When 26th Avenue is improved, it is proposed to assess the abutting
property owners. In advance of any assessment or the final approval of -
proceeding with improving 26th Avenue, there will be a public hearing:'
All adjacent property owners will be notified of this hearing. Since your
property faces 26th Avenue and your driveway access is to 26th Avenue, you
will not receive a notice of the proposed improvements of the streets
south of 26th Avenue. You would not be assessed for any improvements that
are proposed in 1990.
At the present time, the City of Plymouth only has a Preliminary
Engineering Report for the proposed improvements on 26th Avenue. This
report is available for review at the City Engineering Department. The
report only gives preliminary details and indicates that the roadway would
be 36 feet wide. You state that your driveway needs to be repaired and
you can no longer wait to do it. I would suggest that you do any repairs
required on your driveway whenever you feel they are necessary. When 26th
Avenue is improved and if it requires any reconstruction on your driveway,
this would be done as part of the City's project. Your driveway would be
reconstructed to a similar condition of that existing at the time 26th
Avenue is improved.
As you are aware, the proposed improvement on 26th Avenue has been
discussed since 1985. Our current program is now projecting the
improvement for 1991. This schedule will be reviewed in the fall of 1990
and I would suggest you contact the City Engineering Department on the
scheduling for 26th Avenue at the end of this year.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
Kathy Zeinemann
February 16, 1990
Page Two
If I can be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
contact me or Dan Faulkner, City Engineer.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
RESIDENT -FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED: au
� ab.�a,.�i a�� Quer /1�ort�, .cap 4.clr�Cc.G.� ✓� .!�-
07� ?V"' Qucu� f✓ XG u MO � o.Ti_P-� � -c u -k a ce � ,rA a -n a.6 tk"
0'U IA -P, /r o -a -s2. 7/zc� n 2� w-4-�
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE: 185 VAo-y Ap- AzL,,z 'I Lie,
.�Z �
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER: 545 9¢7$
February 16, 1990 PC,�
PLYMOUTR
Steven Burk
11775 40th Place
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mr. Burk:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. You were requesting whether a four-way stop could be
placed at the intersection of Old County Road 9 and Larch Lane to slow
down traffic.
Since the opening of New County Road 9, the traffic volumes on Old
County Road 9 are very low. The major traffic is on 41st Avenue, in and
out of the Mission Residential Development south of County Road 9.
Based upon the number of vehicles at this intersection, it does not
warrant a four-way stop.
Over the past years, the Police Department has monitored the speed of
vehicles on 41st Avenue. They have not found an extraordinarily high.
number of vehicles exceeding the 30 mile per hour speed limit. As on
all of our streets within the City, there are always some motorists who
do not obey our traffic laws. 41st Avenue is one of the areas where the
Police Department periodically places radar surveillance in order to
assure that the drivers continue to comply with the posted speed limits.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore,•P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this -form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
4
" t•
CC-
Lae-); :eve t `} S �-- Cy e�rou_s
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:�-
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 112 7 s
PHONE NUMBER:ug- _r'S-) - O 13Z
W 9-z-�C(- ( ct-Z:6
February 12, 1990
Shirley M. Rucke
12100 29th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
Dear Ms. Rucke:
CIN OF
PLYMOUTI-F
I have your "Resident Feedback Form" that you submitted at the January 29th
Town Meeting; you have inquired about the realty sign on West Medicine Lake
Drive at approximately 30th Avenue North. You noted that it had faded and
that it seemed too close to the road.
The City Ordinance does govern development announcement signs and a member of
my staff investigated it in response to your inquiry. The owner of the sign
has been contacted and has been informed of the ordinance requirement which
limits the duration of such signs.
The owner is also responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the sign as
well as for assuring that it is properly set back from the public right-of-
way.
It is my understanding the sign will be removed. We will reinspect the
location to ensure that the ordinance requirements have been met.
Thank you for your tip; we depend upon citizens to keep us informed of
situations which are not apparent to the City staff at all times. Also, thank
you for attending the town meeting. Please let me know if we can be of
further assistance.
Sincerely,
4;1^1 1��A �-
Blair Tremere
Community Development Director
cc: City Manager James G. Willis
pl/bt/rucke:cm
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED: Of x:# J OL -4 d--
94
1
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE �-7
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: .
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: a L2 2,v
PHONE NUMBER: %— e'l V
February 16, 1990
Dennis Westly
3020 Kilmer Lane
Plymouth, MN 55441
p:4
„x
Y�
CI1 1 c
PLYMOUTR
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mr. Westly:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. You addressed the need for additional sweeping on 30th
Avenue and Kilmer Lane because of the seal coating of the streets last
year. Also, you wanted to know why City snow plows cannot make turns in
cul-de-sacs while plowing snow.
Although all of the streets were swept last year to collect the excess
gravel used in seal coating, they will also require additional sweeping
this spring. This sweeping will take place in April or the first two
weeks of May as soon as weather permits. If you do not think your area
has received adequate sweeping when this is completed, please contact
Tom Vetsch, Street Supervisor.
The majority of the City snow plowing equipment that is needed to plow
the snow from our over 200 miles of streets is too large to make the
turns in cul-de-sacs. For this reason, we have smaller pickup trucks or
hire contractors to plow the cul-de-sacs. The City has over 400 cul-de-
sacs and the plowing of each one is different. Because of the driveway
locations, mailboxes, and landscaping, the snow plowers must choose a
location where they can push the snow. At times this is also
complicated by property owners pushing the snow from their driveways out
into the City street.
The City is :receiving its first major snow storm of this year on
February 16. If you do not feel your cul-de-sac was adequately plowed,
please contact Tom Vetsch, Street Supervisor, and he will meet with you
and review your concerns.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
Tom Vetsch, Street Supervisor
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
�i1t_ tyle- ;
r
NAME OF CONCERNED
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER: �� '-'Q�%�
<k
PC
February 16, 1990
PIYMOUTR
Clayton L. Anderson
510 Sycamore Circle North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comments. Your form addresses the proposed extension of 6th Avenue
between Pineview Lane and Highway 55. The purpose of this roadway
extension is not to encourage traffic from using this as a shortcut
between the interchange at Interstate 494 and Carlson Parkway and
Highway 55.
As I believe you are aware, there is a lot of land south of Highway 55
in the vicinity of the existing Honeywell building which is currently
undeveloped. As this traffic continues to develop, additional traffic
will be generated within the area. The purpose of 6th Avenue is to
provide for a street system for this traffic to get into and out of the
area without using the adjacent residential streets. As you can see on*.'
the existing portions of 6th Avenue, there are no properties which
directly front on 6th Avenue, this has been done by design. In the
future, the traffic on 6th Avenue will not impact residential driveways.
Recently, the City of Plymouth reviewed our transportation system. A
major revision was made on proposed 6th Avenue by connecting it to
Highway 55 at approximately Goldenrod Lane (existing access to the
Honeywell building) instead of extending 6th Avenue easterly all the way
to County Road 73 and Highway 55. By doing this, it will discourage
more traffic from using 6th Avenue as a through street to the industrial
area. One of: the downsides of this change is that additional traffic
will use the existing Sunset Trail to access the area.
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Sincerely,
-Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
I= 1
jp—
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question.or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which, you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED: 6 "4r e- Wo. CdPvl%ny)
#x bk ck o � m y aot. nod dare -;� Ste *a gc Mist ma re- Aan 14
4Lrea c� �o I�1 )qwa aA-,e. eXe4in� np a-4, -/o be'Aw e&rj
IV
lo�`�� • Px� H-d� , u
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: (fle , i��s®o
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: .3/0 e"? more L4Ircf,- Alb.
PHONE NUMBER: s4Q- 034!0
February 16, 1990 PITVF
PUMOUTR
John Springer
404 Forestview Lane
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mr. Springer:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. Your question concerned the disposal of branches since
they do not compost.
Presently, Hennepin County is working to establish a disposal site for
trees and branches as part of the Yardwaste Disposal System. Some twigs
or small branches will be allowed to go with the compost. Larger tree
material will need to be disposed of at the County disposal site. This
disposal site is to be available by this spring. I would suggest you
contact your trash collector on how you need to separate or prepare your
material for collection.
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact;
me or Dick Pouliot in the City Engineering Department.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rquenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to j
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone•nuT
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your conc;
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
-' Ti*y i0 6
MA7PO,l.,. /Jo[d W.' c z. W(, 0) ,0060 060 Gr XW C,1
WNAT kioaA /S A1,V z v7,0 "1'7
CA1,ByCCJ 6c v T/lA/L A Chi we -67 d7 Awax-
t� n A117W 1✓,OZ19rn d -A 17 tl2, Ni AIWO;Fi'66o (aN 4-1ea4;M4W`W)
ACTIOkYOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:
PHONE NUMBER:
SYY-Z%2 • � w�2���
CITY OF
February 16, 1990 PUMOUTR
Gary Medin
680 Windemere Curve
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Mr. Medin:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comments. Your form addresses the proposed extension of 6th Avenue
between Pineview Lane and Highway 55. The purpose of this roadway
extension is not to encourage traffic from using this as a shortcut
between the interchange at Interstate 494 and Carlson Parkway and
Highway 55.
As I believe you are aware, there is a lot of land south of Highway 55
in the vicinity of the existing Honeywell building which is currently
undeveloped. As this traffic continues to develop, additional traffic
will be generated within the area. The purpose of 6th Avenue is to
provide for a street system for this traffic to get into and out of the
area without using the adjacent residential streets. As you can see on;
the existing portions of 6th Avenue, there are no properties which
directly front on 6th Avenue, this has been done by design. In the
future, the traffic on 6th Avenue will not impact residential driveways.
Recently, the City of Plymouth reviewed our transportation system. A
major revision was made on proposed 6th Avenue by connecting it to
Highway 55 at approximately Goldenrod Lane (existing access to the
Honeywell building) instead of extending 6th Avenue easterly all the way
to County Road 73 and Highway 55. By doing this, it will discourage
more traffic from using 6th Avenue as a through street to the industrial
area. One of- the downsides of this change is that additional traffic
will use the existing Sunset Trail to access the area.
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
eW exX1 t3 -N
(0\1j
S
rA
/ , 2
//W--� d0
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 6eO ✓e -
PHONE NUMBER: W
.. s
r
February 16, 1990 CITY OF
PIYMOUTR
Sue and John Byrnes
10705 34th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Sue and John:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review and
comment. You address the proposed improvement of East Medicine Lake Road
between 6th Avenue and 28th Avenue. The City of Plymouth has recognized the
need for improving this roadway and at the present time it is proposed for
1991.
The City's road improvement needs to be scheduled and coordinated with
Hennepin Parks, who will be constructing a major trailway along this same
roadway to provide access into the French Regional Park. Currently, their
plans are to construct the trail in 1991, and therefore, this is the same year
which the City has scheduled the road improvements.
Because of the closeness of some of the existing homes to the roadway, --the
road cannot be improved or the trail construction without major acquisition of
property including existing homes. These homes will be purchased by the
Regional Park System, and therefore, allow the improvement of the roadway and
the construction of the trail.
As you may have observed at the meeting, there were comments from property
owners who live directly on the roadway which do not want it improved. They
would like to keep the roadway in its existing poor condition in order to
discourage traffic from using the street which also serves as their driveway
access. The City has recognized the need to improve the roadway and will
continue to work with all of the adjacent property owners and the Park System
in order that an improvement can be constructed which will provide for the
traffic needs of the entire neighborhood.
If there are any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 7 QS J V
PHONE NUMBER: J -)— 4
EvAbL
CITY OF
February 16, 1990 PLYMOUTI4
Marty Guritz
735 Windemere Drive
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT: JANUARY 29 - AREA THREE TOWN MEETING
Dear Marty:
Mayor Bergman has forwarded your Resident Feedback form to me for review
and comment. Yes, the City will repair lawns that were scalped by
snowplowing during the snowplowing of our city streets. If your yard
was damaged, you should contact our City Street Division (550-5090) and
they will put you on a list for sod repair for this spring.
As it has been discussed at several town meetings, 6th Avenue is needed
to serve the increase in traffic as the vacant area south of Highway 55
in the vicinity of the Honeywell property continues to develop. A major
change was made this year in proposed 6th Avenue to further decrease its
use by through traffic accessing the industrial area. As you are aware,
6th Avenue was originally proposed to extend easterly to County Road 73.•
Our plans have now been revised and 6th Avenue will curve northerly and"
intersect Highway 55 at approximately Goldenrod Lane.
Presently, the improvement of 6th Avenue is tentatively scheduled for
1994. When there is a definite schedule for the improvement of this
roadway, the City Council will hold public information meetings. By
attending future Town Meetings, or contacting the City Engineering
Department, you can keep informed of the proposals for 6th Avenue.
If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
1
CITY OF
February 12, 1990 PLYMOUTR
Marty Guritz
735 Windemere Drive
Plymouth, MN 55441
Dear Marty:
I have reviewed your "Resident Feedback Form" that you submitted at the
January 29 Town Meeting. You asked about the plans for Beacon Heights School
now that it has been sold.
The City informed the school district and the party that bought it last month
that the zoning ordinance is very restrictive as to the use of this building.
Essentially, the property can be used for single family dwellings, schools, or
churches. The building could, therefore, be used for public or private school
purposes, or for a place of worship.
The buyer indicated he had several plans in mind but has not yet submitted
them to the City for review and approval.
Therefore, it is our understanding that the new owner intends to use the
existing building, rather than to clear the land; it is also important to note
that the ordinance would require a public hearing before any future use is
established in the building.
You may contact me or Community Development Coordinator, Chuck Dillerud,
periodically to see what the current status of this property is, and we can
let you know whether any formal plans have been submitted for future uses.
Incidentally, we have also informed the owner that the City is very concerned
about code deficiencies and the security of the site while the building is
vacant. We will. be contacting the owner regarding the need to abate any
hazards or features which could be attractive
Thank you for attending the Town Meeting and for your inquiry.
Sincerely,
�L
Blair Tremere
Community Development Director
cc: City Manager James G. Willis
pl/bt/guritz:cm
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not -appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
�/l.�Cif�YV ^ „?L�� - � �•��i Geo
NAME OF�NED ESIDENT: .
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: 73a
PHONE NUMBER: / 7(,/
February 12, 1990
Mr. David M. Kjos
3905 Orleans Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55441
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Kjos:
CIN OF
PLYMOUTFF
You submitted a "Resident Feedback form" at the January 29 Town Meeting and
you inquired about the status of the Four Seasons shopping center as well as
the 24-hour operation of the Holiday Plus store.
The owner of the Four Seasons Shopping Center has, over time, presented
speculative plans as to ways the existing shopping center could be enlarged.
There have been recent concept plans presented to the City staff for review,
and those plans suggest an enlargement of the existing building. There have
been no plans for a Cub Food Store or similar freestanding operation.
We have responded to the speculative plan noting that all ordinance
requirements relative to setbacks and parking would have to be satisfied; this
has not been apparent with the plans that have been submitted to date.
The ownership of the Holiday Plus store successfully challenged the City
requirement for less than 24-hour operation in court. The court ruled that
requiring Holiday Plus to close at a certain hour and, thus, to not be open
24 -hours a day was inconsistent with allowing other stores to be open around
the clock; it was also noted that the City ordinances do not specify hours of
operation for retail stores such as Holiday Plus.
The City does have requirements for service stations and fast food restaurants
which are applicable as a result of the conditional use permits issued for
those operations; the Holiday Plus store is not a conditional use. Thus, the
Holiday Plus store can be open up to 24 -hours per day as they determined.
Thank you for attending the town meeting. Questions may be directed to me or
to Community Development Coordinator Chuck Dillerud (550-5059).
g
erel
Blair T e re
Community Development Director
cc: City Manager James G. Willis
pl/bt/kjos:cm
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBACK FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you'provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
&X� — lot
VV
ACTION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
zz
oill
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT:
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT:l✓-
PHONE NUMBER:
7,?,F—16S-
/
X 7b
CIN OF
PLYMOUTI-F
February 16, 1990
Norman Gartner
12910 56th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55442
Dear Mr. Gartner:
Cl+ VV_tW__'1 -
71
Mayor Bergman forwarded me your request to be placed on the distribution list
for City Council and Planning Commission agendas.
I have added your name to the City Council agenda mailing list. You should
receive your first agenda prior to the February 26 City Council meeting.
There is no charge for this service.
Since there is a fee for receiving the Planning Commission agendas, I have not
yet added your name to the Planning Commission mailing list. I have enclosed
a postage -paid envelope for you to return to the Planning Department with your
check in the amount of $12.72, if you choose to be included on the list. This
amount will cover a one-year period.
If you desire additional information on a particular item after receiving your
agenda, feel free to call me at 550-5014 and I will refer you to the
appropriate staff person. Also, the staff reports on each agenda item are
available for public review at the City Center Information Counter,
3400 Plymouth Blvd., during the day on Monday prior to each Council meeting.
Sincerely,
Laurie Rauenhorst-
City Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
RESIDENT FEEDBAG( FORM
Please use this form if you have a question or concern which does not appear
on the town meeting agenda to which you would like the City to respond
and/or investigate. If you provide your name, address and phone number, we
will advise you of our actions and findings with respect to your concern.
NATURE OF CONCERN/PROPERTY ADDRESS INVOLVED:
' ANION YOU DESIRE THE CITY TO TAKE:
NAME OF CONCERNED RESIDENT: Noel-/;P—Z" �-,zWz iF�
ADDRESS OF RESIDENT: /,-.* 9/' �� �y�', X/• , SS yo2
PHONE NUMBER:
•
F
4
4
to
��
�
' E 9! $
'
•O � a
--sem-- ----- -- 3 a
SE j
Olt
K � A G",
� .7f
u �i � � > .n u Tm
°E?
.a c �� � �•� E �r �� u r� Vt
1Ego
>• qr
ii.Eo�ms �
>•e5.
5 E e
C a O Eig
pcnS=p w 0 a s e a 3sploo0 ..
>
HA
E E g'u _
a vact
._ s 4 y�
Saar HN 2 Fgor���3� a
34 " fiEl
L-7
MEMO MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: February 16, 1990
TO: JamesXINCOUNTY
City Manager
FROM: Charl erud, Community Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: HENNE APPLICATION FOR WASTE TRANSFER STATION (89057)
On July 23, 1989 Hennepin County made application for a Conditional Use Permit
to construct a solid waste transfer station at the northeast corner of County
Road 6 and I-494, pursuant to Section 9, Subdivision D. of the Zoning
Ordinance (Hazardous Waste Facilities Conditional Uses).
Development Review Committee review of the application commenced immediately
together with activity to retain a qualified consultant to review the
application on behalf of the City of Plymouth, as the Ordinance specifies. It
should be noted that the review by the outside consultant is at the expense of
the project applicant.
On August 29, 1989, we drafted a letter to Hennepin County reviewing 35 items
that are in need of modification; additional clarification; or additional
information. These review comments were only the result of review by the City
of Plymouth staff and usual retained utilities and traffic consultants.
On July 24, 1989, we advised Hennepin County that the City of Plymouth had
selected Black and Veatch, Kansas City, to be the consultant that would review
technical aspects of their application on our behalf. On August 4, 1989,
Hennepin County delivered the necessary financial deposit and authorization to
proceed with the review of the application by the outside consultant. On
August 10, 1989,'we instructed Black and Veatch to proceed with their review.
Black and Veatch completed their review and on October 18, 1989, we
transmitted a copy of the Black and Veatch report, together with a list of 34
additional design -related items requiring additions, modifications of
clarifications related to plans that had been submitted by Hennepin County for
this facility. These additional design review items were generated from the
report presented by Black and Veatch.
To date, neither our design review letter of August 29, 1989, nor our design
review letter of October 18, 1989 has been responded to by Hennepin County.
The project remains in Stage 2 of the development review process, and cannot
proceed until the applicant has provided responses we have requested.
(pl/cd/trans.sta:jw)
CITY C
PLYMOUTR
February 12, 1990
Mr. Ronald Libby
Bass Lake Inc.
11540 County Road 10
Plymouth, MN 55442
Dear Mr. Libby:
A
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 90-71 which imposes a penalty for the
liquor law violation that occurred at Bass Lake Liquors on July 21, 1989.
The Council imposed a $500 penalty, which is stayed on the following
conditions:
1. That Bass Lake Inc., have no further liquor law violations during the next
12 months, and
2. That you submit a check for $500, payable to the City of Plymouth, to me
by March 5, 1990, and
3. That you immediately initiate a written, aggressive identification carding
program shared with your employees, including disciplinary action for
employee failure to card customers. The written program is to be
submitted to me by March 5, 1990.
Failure to provide me with your $500 check and identification carding program
by March 5, 1990, will result in the $500 penalty. If you have any questions
regarding this action, please call me.
Sincerely,
Laurie Rauenhorst
City Clerk
cc: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
=- \ u 0 --
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 5th day of February , 19_
The following members were present: Helliwell, Zitur, Vasiliou, Ricker, Bergman
The following members were absent: None
Councilmember Ricker introduced the following Resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 90-71
IMPOSING PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LAW VIOLATION
AGAINST BASS LAKE INC.
WHEREAS, the Plymouth City Code provides that any liquor licenge issued by the City may
be denied, suspended, or revoked by the Council for any violation pertaining to the
activity of the license held, and
WHEREAS, Plymouth City Code Section 1005.23 provides that no license may be suspended
or revoked until after a hearing is held; and
WHEREAS, a liquor law violation relating to sale of liquor to a minor occurred at Bass
Lake, Inc., 11540 County Road 10, on July 21, 1989, and
WHEREAS, this liquor law violation is the first offense at this location, and
WHEREAS, a hearing was held on January 22, 1990, and continued to February 5, 1990, to
determine whether the license should be suspended or revoked.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA,
that a $500 penalty is hereby imposed against Bass Lake Inc. The penalty is stayed on
the following conditions:
1. That the licensee have no liquor law violations during the next 12 months, and
2. That a check in the amount of $500 payable to the City of Plymouth be received
by the City Clerk within 30 days of the passage of this resolution and
deposited in City of Plymouth Account 205-000-503.00-093-000 to be used for
drug education purposes, and
3. That Bass Lake Inc., immediately initiate a written, aggressive identifiction
carding program shared with its clerks including disciplinary action for clerk
failure to card customers. The written program is to be submitted to the City
Clerk within 30 days of passage of this resolution for City Council review.
The motion for adoption of the -foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember Vasiliou , and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Helliwell, Zitur, Vasiliou, Ricker, Bergman
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
MINNESOTA 1990 /
EducationMinnesota Department of
Capitol Square 550 Cedar Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
February 13, 1990
James Willis
City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Willis:
.\ - \,A)a
FEB 16 1990
Governor Rudy Perpich and I are very pleased to have the opportunity to invite
you to a special "Capital for a Day” breakfast meeting with educators,
students, and citizens from Robbinsdale and its surrounding communities.
Recognition will be given to many individuals who have made outstanding
contributions to education and to their community.
Linda Powell, Superintendent of Robbinsdale Area Schools, will be hosting this
breakfast meeting from 6:45 - 8:30 a.m. on Friday, February 23, 1990, at the
Robbinsdale Area Community Education Center, 4139 Regent Avenue North,
Robbinsdale, MN 55422. Parking will be available in front of the building. ..
Please R.S.V.P. at 533-2781, extension 201, by February 20 to confirm your
attendance.
Governor Perpich will speak and participate in an awards presentation. After
his presentation, he will be inviting questions and comments from the
audience. I encourage you to be an active participant by asking questions or
providing comments regarding educational issues.
You are important to the continued development of Minnesota's educational
system. We are looking forward to a very pleasant, productive day.
Sincerely,
Tom Nelson
Commissioner of Education
TN:llbpmD1-7
It, It t It It It, i It AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER It It. It It It t It t It t It
February 12, 1990
Mr. Frank Boyles, Asst. City Manager
Plymouth City Center
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Boyles:
�° ,'
INTERFAITH OUTREACH
& COMMUNITY PARTNERS
"People Uniting to Help People"
Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners is a nonprofit partner-
ship of local churches, schools, government, businesses, community
groups, foundations--people--united by a common commitment to help
people of our community. The Communities we serve are Hamel, Maple
Plain, West Medicine Lake, Southwest Plymouth, Long Lake, Medina,
Orono and Wayzata. Our services include a broad range of emergency
services e.g., information, advocacy, referral, funds, a food and
clothing shelf and specialized services such as a Befriender program,
a Transportation Program, Single Parent Services, Housing Advocacy
and a Holiday Outreach Program. For the past ten years we have been
serving the local community and as our services have grown, so has .
the need for cross sector financial support.
Local government has been a very critical part of our growth history
and we are anxious to continue that partnership and to deepen it.
�'We would very much appreciate information relative to the process
for submitting proposals for funding for the next budget year. Thank
you so much for all past encouragement and for giving this request
your kind consideration.
Sincerely,
( v
;*.
LaDonna Hoy, Director
INTERFAITH OUTREACH AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS
LH/ j c
Encs.
P.S.. As you may know, we are in our new home... 110 Grand Avenue S.
in Wayzata and would love to have you come by to see our new place
and to enthuse with us about future possibilities.
110 Grand Avenue South, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391-1872 473-2436
►IAS
February 15, 1990 CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
LaDonna Hoy, Director
Interfaith Outreach and
Community Partners
110 Grand Avenue South
Wayzata, MN 55391-1872
SUBJECT: FUNDING REQUEST FOR 1991
A
Dear Ms. Hoy:
Your February 12, 1990 letter inquired about the process which the City of
Plymouth uses to facilitate human service agency funding requests during the
annual City budget cycle. The City Council's past practice has been to
notify those human service agencies which the City is currently funding.
The agencies then make their written request. Included with the request is
the report regarding the types of services supplied to Plymouth residents
and the number of persons served during the preceding year.
I am attaching for your information a copy of the City Council's policy with
respect to funding human service agencies. I do not know yet whether the
City Council will want the staff to contact all human service agencies who
have expressed an interest in funding for 1991, or only those agencies which
actually received 1990 funding. That will be a determination the City
Council will make1 ter this year. Feel free to contact me in June so I can
bring you up to dA on this subject. My number is 550-5013.
Fra�es
Assis ant City Manager
FB:kec
cc: Mayor and City Council
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
--L o'a c
POLICY RELATING TO CITY FUNDING OF HUMAN SERVICE AGENCIES
Resolution No. 84-506
Ouly 23, 1984
IN GENERAL
The City Council is aware that there are many worthwhile human service agencies
serving metropolitan area residents and that such organizations are supported
primarily through public and private contributions. Contributions to such agencies
from the City of Plymouth, when made, will be distributed in accordance with this
policy.
POLICY GUIDELINES
The Plymouth City Council is responsible for periodically determining whether a
financial or in-kind contribution will be made by the City to assist human service
agencies. The City Council will consider the following guidelines in determining
which human service agency(ies), if any, receive funding. This policy should not be
construed to obligate the City Council to provide funding or in-kind human service
contributions.
1. The City Council shall not normally engage in long term (multi-year) funding to
any human service agency. Instead, all funding shall be evaluated for impact and
appropriateness each year.
2. The City Council will normally consider human service priorities established
annually by the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board and Northwest Hennepin
Human Services Planning Board and will confine funding to those identified
priorities.
3. Human service agencies will be expected to provide data substantiating the need
for their specific type of service within the Plymouth community. Specific
figures on the Plymouth population(s) served through their efforts, fiscal
analysis of cost of delivery of such services and documentation that their
services do not duplicate those of other agencies serving the Plymouth population.
4. The City Council will only consider funding programs or agencies which can demon-
strate that the funds are used solely to provide services to Plymouth residents.
5. The City will give preference to funding human service delivery agencies that act
as an advocate and advisor regarding other available human services for the
Plymouth population.
6. Funding requests will normally be considered in relation to existing City human
service commitments and the target populations served.
-25-
Resolution No. 84-506 1 `'JA C_
Page 2
7. Preference will be given to agencies or programs which:
a) Have taken affirmative efforts to raise funds to support their efforts.
b) Demonstrate in their budgets that there is a continuing concentration on
minimizing adminsitrative and overhead costs.
c) Cannot be effectively or fully funded through other sources.
d) Sponsor programs which have verifiable benefits to the community at large -
for example, programs that put people to work or enhance the effectiveness of
City service delivery programs.
e) Make effective use of volunteer skills and in-kind contributions to reduce the
cost of program/service delivery.
-25a-